<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>StumbleUpon | ColinCochrane's blog posts</title>
<link>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/</link>
<description>ColinCochrane's recent blog posts on StumbleUpon</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:53:20 -0700</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:45:34 -0700</lastBuildDate>
<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.stumbleupon.com/" />
<atom:link href="http://rss.stumbleupon.com/user/ColinCochrane/blog" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:21:49 -0800</pubDate>
<title><![CDATA[http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/16694087/]]></title>
<link>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/16694087/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/16694087/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[There are certain things in the Stumblers vs internet marketers trainwreck that I always find odd.<br />
<br />
<ol><br />
    <li>Since when did Search Engine Optimization, (with <u>search engine</u> being the key word), get tangled up with social media?  I'm an SEO Analyst, and my job focuses on optimizing sites for the search engines, not social media traffic.  It pisses me off when     I see someone peddling advice on gaming social sites under the guise of &quot;SEO&quot;.  It isn't.</li><br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <li>Alleged internet marketing &quot;experts&quot; blogging about methods to maximize social traffic.  The fact of the matter is that any marketing professional (internet or otherwise) worth their salt knows that its conversions that count.  What use is 50,000 people viewing something if not one of them makes a purchase?  Social traffic is well-known to have an incredibly low-conversion rate, so why waste time that could be better spent on improving the site or optimizing it to increase regular search traffic?  Even if the goal is simply a lot of raw visitors for AdSense, the same principles apply, because there are going to be almost no clicks on ads, and any CPM revenue will be chalked up to click fraud and withheld.  Once again, nothing but a waste of time and bandwidth for 50,000 visitors who didn't buy anything.</li><br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <li>The increasing amount of people that are blindly jumping into the fray to support their &quot;side&quot; and attack the other.  I say blindly because after reading some of the comments its pretty obvious that the author of the comment took no time to actually assess the situation (read the offending post/submission/site/etc...) before commenting.  There are offenders on both sides, and they are thankfully not the majority (on either side).</li><br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <li>The amount of people in the internet marketer camp who take some negative feedback too seriously.  Someone posting a review that says &quot;piss off and die&quot; is not a death threat.</li><br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <li>On the flip side of #4, the amount of people who take the time to craft fairly lengthy negative responses that most would find offensive and out-of-line, and <i>don't</i> think that it is offensive.  It's one thing to thumb something down and write a quick &quot;this is spam&quot;, or &quot;stop posting this crap&quot;, it's another to author a detailed 5 paragraph response detailing the ways in which the person should be tortured and killed.</li><br />
    <br />
</ol>]]></description>
<comments>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/16694087/</comments>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:07:19 -0800</pubDate>
<title><![CDATA[http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15728869/]]></title>
<link>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15728869/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15728869/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Oh Disney...<br />
<br />
<img src="http://www.colincochrane.com/image.axd?picture=chipracist1.jpg" alt="Disney Stereotypes at their finest: Chip and Dale's Rescue Rangers Oriental Cats" /><br />
<br />
That brought back some memories.  It also had me laughing for a good five minutes.]]></description>
<comments>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15728869/</comments>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:27:51 -0800</pubDate>
<title><![CDATA[http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15523961/]]></title>
<link>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15523961/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15523961/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I'm visiting my parents for a few days for Christmas this year.  I usually bring my laptop along so I can get a bit of coding or writing done on the ferry, but usually don't touch it other than that because of the lack of wireless internet access at their house.  This trip I thought I'd give it a shot anyways and lo-and-behold, I managed to scrape a usable signal from someone's nearby wireless network (the only one in range) which is, luckily enough, unsecured.  Now I can continue to blog without any impediments and continue doing work that I really should be ignoring for at least a couple of days during the holidays.]]></description>
<comments>http://ColinCochrane.stumbleupon.com/review/15523961/</comments>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
