I understand that. However, readability, or the lack thereof, has very little to do with being found.

You’ve written the same thing about quality vs results before, most recently on Inman, so it’s my goal to dispel the belief that a writer of your caliber would have to compromise to compete. A site like your castles site with your local content could and should be more readily found for Scripps Ranch real estate, and it’s certainly better for the user than what is currently on page one now. SanDiegoCastles.com at #1 would be the map to the treasure
you mentioned.

As for the horse, no way I’m giving up. When you speak, people listen, but this is the one thing where I don’t want them to believe you. I don’t even want you to believe you on this. You don’t have to change a word. It isn’t all or nothing. You really can have it both ways.

That is hysterical in its simplicity and brilliant in its eloquence, Diane. I think you may have just come up with the title of the opening panel session at Inman NY.

Just so there is no misunderstanding, Bob, I like Google, and I like Page Ones. I wish I was on more of them. And, yes, I know I suck at SEO and would probably (certainly) enjoy more success, however it is that we are measuring that this week, if I used my noggin a little instead of thoughtlessly typing whatever thoughts happen to pop into my head. It is a matter of priorities for me, and I place a higher priority on the readability once I am found than being found in the first place. This is admittedly foolhardy, but I’m stubborn that way.

I think it could be argued that we have sufficiently beat this horse.

It wasn’t rhetorical. Would it surprise anyone if the answer was search engines?

A few years ago the NY Times brought in one of the best SEOs out there. The assumption was that he would work his magic and they would own Google, after all, they are the NY Times. He did his thing with site architecture, etc, but what they didn’t expect was that he required everyone from copyboy to editor go thru his training on writing for an audience that includes search engines.

The end result was subtle changes that most would never pick up on that generated some pretty big positive results.

The point is that the concept of “just write it for Ma and Pa kettle and they (Ma, Pa and google) will come” isn’t true. But the notion that you have to write keyword stuffed crap isn’t true either.

I dont write a lot of blog posts, and when I do, they are geared to the consumer who doesnt know me and isnt looking for me. They are looking for specific answers. They find those via a search engine because it seemed to me that, this being a numbers game, that would be the easiest way to get in front of the most numbers.

The end game is I get search engine results that bring traffic that continues to generate business (over a dozen listings with offers pending), and close to 1200 comments in 14 months, even though only 2 posts were written in 2008.

The thing is, it will be what you are willing to make it. You don’t need to write everyday, every week or even every month, and you certainly don’t need a ghost writer. However, learning how to leverage the exposure of what you do publish seems obvious to me.