<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Link-Fest for Friday May 9th 2008</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.seopscentre.com/link-fests/week-ending-friday-may-9th-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.seopscentre.com/link-fests/week-ending-friday-may-9th-2008/</link>
	<description>Learning By Doing</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:27:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Jones</title>
		<link>http://www.seopscentre.com/link-fests/week-ending-friday-may-9th-2008/#comment-121</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 13:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seopscentre.com/?p=30#comment-121</guid>
		<description>Thanks for stopping by Greg.  I do believe that you weren't intentionally linkbaiting, that's just how things turned out.
And I agree with your statement that "SEO as we know it is going to continue its death spiral."  But the key turn of phrase there is "as we know it."
Where we differ is that I feel (and judging by your post's comments so do a lot of other people) this just means that SEO will have to adapt and evolve to account for new trends in search, just as it has done in the past when major changes have occurred.
Whether that's in the form of so-called SEO 2.0 or something else entirely, the simple fact is that as long as there are search engines there will be people working to ensure that their sites are optimized to appeal to they way those engines rank their results.
It's the ones who fail to evolve and stick with outdated practices (like the meta-tagging example you gave) that will die out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for stopping by Greg.  I do believe that you weren&#8217;t intentionally linkbaiting, that&#8217;s just how things turned out.<br />
And I agree with your statement that &#8220;SEO as we know it is going to continue its death spiral.&#8221;  But the key turn of phrase there is &#8220;as we know it.&#8221;<br />
Where we differ is that I feel (and judging by your post&#8217;s comments so do a lot of other people) this just means that SEO will have to adapt and evolve to account for new trends in search, just as it has done in the past when major changes have occurred.<br />
Whether that&#8217;s in the form of so-called SEO 2.0 or something else entirely, the simple fact is that as long as there are search engines there will be people working to ensure that their sites are optimized to appeal to they way those engines rank their results.<br />
It&#8217;s the ones who fail to evolve and stick with outdated practices (like the meta-tagging example you gave) that will die out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Howlett</title>
		<link>http://www.seopscentre.com/link-fests/week-ending-friday-may-9th-2008/#comment-120</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg Howlett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 12:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seopscentre.com/?p=30#comment-120</guid>
		<description>Hi, thanks for writing about my article.  You may not believe this, but it was not linkbait.  I just do not mind taking an unpopular position if I believe in it!  In my opinion, SEO is on life support.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, thanks for writing about my article.  You may not believe this, but it was not linkbait.  I just do not mind taking an unpopular position if I believe in it!  In my opinion, SEO is on life support.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
