Intasar Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Hi,Firstly, thanks to IPS Staff, specially Matt who think that like mine peoples who currently are not the Client of IPS or License expired members can post Feedback for this Respected software. I have reported a bug, but Matt thought these are "FEEDBACK" and can be discuss able. So, Please read this topic http://community.invisionpower.com/tracker/issue-36069-few-more-seo-issue/ and discuss, its Right or Wrong ? beneficial or Costly ? Thanks advanced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcher Technologies Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Hi, [color=#ff0000]Firstly, thanks to IPS Staff, specially Matt who think that like mine peoples who currently are not the Client of IPS or License expired members can post Feedback for this Respected software.[/color] I have reported a bug, but Matt thought these are "FEEDBACK" and can be discuss able. So, Please read this topic http://community.inv...more-seo-issue/ and discuss, its Right or Wrong ? beneficial or Costly ? Thanks advanced #2.. not certain which of the two should be dropped.... but I wholeheartedly agree one needs to go.... not simply for SEO reasons, but because showing who started the topic twice on the first page is an exercise in redundant redundancy IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimi Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 These are all about SEO vs. Functionality (except maybe number 3). I can't say I agree with any of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intasar Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 Hi Marcher T, #2, its also a bad practice of "On-page optimization". same 4 links produce 2 "useless" keywords. 1) photo 2) member name. i means in whole forum the keyword "Photo" is the most Inlinked keyword. same applied on Member name. @ Rimi Its not about "Functionality vs SEO" because Google itself is a function able System. same as other Search engines. its all about "Bad practice of SEO". in simple, Poor on page optimization Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimi Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Well I would rather not see timestamps removed from the board index and I like that they go to the last post. Besides you're wrong, the topic title does not go to the last post, it goes to the first unread post. The links are different, but can be the same in some cases. Additionally if I am on page two of a thread then those 4 same links drops to two, one of which is a hovercard. We could then argue that we should just remove the link of the avatar, but I think it's expected behavior for an avatar to link to a person's profile. Adding "last post by" to the forum index is just too bulky. It was in 3.1.4 I believe and was removed for a reason. Changing the paging navigation to include the name of the board is also far too bulky, unless you were stating that to be the title tag or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intasar Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 Hi Rimi, I m not pointing to remove "time stamp", let me explain more for You. If you seen image, i only pointed the things that can be showing "Uniquely" and in the "link Title" tag. not in the Anchor text. and as you look well aware about Functionality. so it can be seprately possible. MEANS "last post" or "First unread post" only for signin users. NOT for any users. including "Search engines" hope you got my point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimi Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Alright so what you're saying is that if you have topic marking disabled for guests then the link is unnecessary. Just kidding that's not what you were saying but I think it works. I can agree with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.