Disqus - Latest Comments for Anonymous (not Dr. Pete)

Re: 7 StumbleUpon Problems I Would Love To See Fixed

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 19:55:02 -0000

Funny, I was just noticing that you're almost always on my "Meet people like you" list on SU, Andy. Funnier still is that you were 1st on the list this afternoon, and Tim was 2nd (and he's the first commenter on this post). I have a feeling it just can't tell us 30-something white guys who read SEO articles apart ;)

I have to admit that I find the SU taxonomy really unwieldy. I never understand what populates the default tags (which sometimes make no sense) and the fill-in-the-blank approach leaves me wondering what tags I should use. I end up putting "internet" on just about everything.

Re: 7 StumbleUpon Problems I Would Love To See Fixed

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 19:55:02 -0000

Re: Introducing The DeTweet

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:01:36 -0000

I like the concept, in the sense that we don't really have a way to comment on Tweets, but I tend to agree with Toby - The Detweet is essentially just drawing attention to the original point. It's a bit like the "don't think of an elephant" phenomenon.

Still, it's worth a shot. I've been wrong before (more than once, according to my wife). The nice thing about conventions like this is that they're easy to start and try out.

Re: Highland Hunk-Fantasy

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:27:42 -0000

Thanks for confirming my decision to reject an entire genre. I'll stick to getting my soft porn on late-night Cinemax and Youtube ;)

As soon as I read "He smelled WOMAN", I had this image of Animal from the Muppet Show in a kilt chasing the guest host yelling "I Smell WO-MAN!"

Re: SEOmoz Expert Seminar 2008 Recap

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:41:35 -0000

Who is this Dr. Pete guy, and why exactly is he so great? Please tell us more ;)

Seriously, it was great to meet you and nice work getting a recap out so quickly. I've barely even woken up. I thought some of the content you don't usually get at search conferences, like Nick and Sarah's presentations, was really useful. I also didn't realize that Danny Sullivan is completely insane (but in a good way).

Re: URLs - Human-Friendly Or Robot-Friendly?

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:45:38 -0000

Skipping the "www" is human friendly? Sorry, but I don't buy that. Sure, it's easier to type, and it may be friendly for the tech-savvy crowd (who know it usually doesn't matter), but usability is all about habit, and most non-savvy users are used to the "www". Heck, a good chunk of people are still typing domain names into Google instead of the address bar on their browser. Let's not confuse people any more than we have to.

Re: The 2008 TwitterStache Awards

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:14:56 -0000

My vote's for Bonkus, mostly for being named Bonkus. I have serious doubts about the veracity of JonathanHong's moustache.

Re: Do you ever google yourself? (Sounds naughty, doesn’t it?)

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:36:34 -0000

One of the reasons I branded as "Dr. Pete" is that my given name (Peter Meyers) is way too common: 251,000 results. On the bright side, I rank #3, #5, and #8 (counting my LinkedIn profile), which isn't too shabby.

Re: Lifted: A Usability Tale

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:29:35 -0000

Nice catch: it never even dawned on me how much of a cautionary usability tale that was. That poor alien trainee really could've used a label maker. It reminds me of some of my electronics where all of the labels and controls are etched in black on black. I need a flashlight and magnifying glass to figure out which slot on the carousel I put the DVD in.

Re: Bryan Eisenberg Answers Questions on Multi-Variate Testing

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:16:27 -0000

Although I guess I'm theoretically a competitor of Bryan's, "Always Be Testing" is a great read, especially if you're getting started with GWO or website testing. Even for seasoned testing professionals, Bryan has a great way of asking questions that get you thinking, especially when you've stared at the same site for months or years.

Dr. Pete's last blog post..Search Without SERPs: The Future of SEO?

Re: Twitter versus Plurk: Not Even in the Same League

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:34:54 -0000

Thanks for the run-down, Tamar; with all of Twitter's outages, I've been really tempted to look for options. I hate to start over building the network, though, especially since it's very likely that Plurk will have the same scaling problems. The simple fact remains that Twitter is taking a pounding on traffic and spam, raking up more and more costs with no revenue model. Once Plurk starts building up traffic, it may have the same problem. Someone's got to find a way to provide these tools and make a living doing it.

Re: Rebecca Kelley Joins the 10e20 Team

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:12:41 -0000

Best mid-season pick-up I've heard about this year :) Congratulations, Rebecca!

Re: Does Social Media Need “Directing”?

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:39:20 -0000

If social media had more "Directors" and less "Gurus", we'd all be better off.

Re: Black Hat vs. White Hat Social Media and the Battle for Common Sense

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:07:57 -0000

In a way, doesn't "black-hat" social media kind of work itself out? If you're constantly self-promoting to the point of spam or creating link-bait to lure in visitors that has nothing to do with your site or industry, people are going to just start ignoring you. It's easier to dupe search visitors, in some ways, because just making it into the organic results gives you some credibility. If your Twitter account, Facebook page or linkbait are crap, people will eventually treat you like a crap-monger.

Re: What Social Buttons Should Go On Your Site?

Anonymous (not Dr. Pete) — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:13:06 -0000

Some days, I'd be happy if sites would just pick a couple, regardless of what they were. Just yesterday, I was on a site that had 25+ social media icons (all full-sized, maybe 1/2" square on my screen) - I'm not even sure I've heard of 25 social media sites, and definitely not ones that I'd use.

There's a basic rule of psychology that we seem to always forget on the web - if you draw attention to everything, you draw attention to nothing. Having half a screen of social media icons is just as dumb as having a blinking red "NEW!" next to everything on your home-page. Year 2009 strategies don't help if you have a year 1999 brain.