sts

What about all caps, Scott? Is it bad to have strategic words in all caps? :Nerd:

I personally saw only image search robots hotlinking images. People tend to upload images to their server, some even provide a link back No?

Are there really a lot of people who steal your bandwidth? I created hotlink.png to redirect to and so far I see only negative effect. People who use online translators to read your pages or who look at Google's cache see this hotlink.png splashed all over your pages. The most unpleasant thing is that this hotlink.png gets stuck in IE cache and people still see it even if they visit your original page So, is hotlink protection worth it?

Cool site, thanks Scott! I like this Lynx-me thing It turns out there are Poison Words woooot but links is not poisonous if it's not a title, right? btw, is nude a Poison Word?

You kidding! I'm a non-programmer creature No, I meant without taking stemming in consideration. I have a problem to calculate the words at all and it seems I overdone it with alt tags

Yes, alt tags. ps is there a reliable tool online to calculate the keyword density?

The main reason I didn't like the cashed version is that hotlink protection makes it look very weird I don't know what's better authorize Google to display the images or tell it not to cache. There are some sites from across the pond that 'hotlink' the whole pages. I believe they are searches too. Well excite.co.jp is search, isn't it?

I have a question about the keyword density. Does alternative text count?

While I was thinking how to optimize my site, googlebot sneaked in and took undesired snapshots, little bugger I think I want it not to cache my index page, but some people say using the noarchive tag can affect your Google rankings negatively. Is it true?

With all due respect, I don't think it's fonts. And setting the fonts to px is not user friendly Most likely IE can't calculate widths of cells properly. There is width="100%" in the table with image. The table is fixed so why not calculate the exact width. Plus the main table is too complicated. It's better to have a few simple tables instead of one complicated. I'd suggest remaking it. Like main cage with 3 cells [plus two 1 pixel spacers if you like]: left cell – px – middle cell – px - right cell left cell - 'Ads by Google' table right cell - 'What's an e-book?...' table middle cell – 3 tables: image table, main text table and 'Basic Screenplay Style and Format...' table And always use spacer.gif instead of nbsp.

Is it because my nameservers disagree as to which version of my DNS is the latest 1073019882 versus 2003123000? woooot I don't understand what that means but I checked DNS report of somebody else who [i think] joined after me and their nameservers agree that their SOA serial number is 2004010100

Ah, I missed TCH-Scott's message, sorry. I registered the domain on Dec. 29. The next morning it appeared in whois so I thought it's time to get hosting then In the evening I ordered hosting, got TCH welcome mail, visited my registrar and updated the DNS pointers. Are you saying I'm too impatient? It propagated the next day and there were no problems with domain, only with subdomains. Does anybody have any idea why this is happening and how to fix it because I'm still having this problem

Thanks Raul! I like their menu. At least page doesn't look ugly if you increase font size. Thanks vangrieg, but I'm afraid I'm too technically challenged even for a few lines of code And sure, I have v. original solution for Javascript disabled people - they will get "go to the site map" button

Thanks, I've seen that page already. Can't use it unfortunately because most of my visitors use outdated browsers: MSIE 6 --------13242 -----67.37% MSIE 5 --------5313 ------27.03% Netscape 7 ---427 --------2.17% Netscape 3 ---244 --------1.24% MSIE 4 --------143 --------0.72% Netscape 4 ----135 --------0.68% AOL 4 ----------135 --------0.68% Other ----------12 ----------0.06% AOL 3 ----------3 -----------0.01% Netscape 4.10% - MSIE 95.13% - Other 0.76% I think this way of navigation is neat and user friendly

Say, Scott, we don't need many keywords, right? Because bots use keywords and body text. Let’s say I have: ><html> <head> <title>Santa Homepage</title> <meta name="Keywords" content="Santa, Santa Clause"> </head> <body> Santa Clause lives at the North Pole with Mrs. Claus, his elves who make toys and reindeer named Rudolf who guides Santa's sleigh with the biological aberration of a red, glowing nose capable of penetrating thick fog. If somebody searched for Santa Clause+Rudolf they find me nicely. So I don't need Rudolf in keywords tag. Is that right?

I was being sarcastic You see this domain we [my hubby and me] have, very politically incorrectly named stufftoSEE, is very politically incorrectly aimed to sighted audience and the site is going to be mostly graphic so I don't know what people with screen readers will be doing there I personally don't plan to provide full description of every picture. Because I'm that bad, yeah And, vangrieg, although beauty is important to me, I'd be happy to use non-Java stuff [simply because I'm not good at Javascript]. Could you provide an example of non-Java drop-down menu with submenus, please?

It's not nice to say 'blind' you should say *vision impaired*

Oh, I forgot to duck! I meant NN 7.1 and Mozilla 1.5 [btw this Mozilla has zoom] I get extremetracking statistics [free] Designer should give user the ability to make font size larger, still, the designer should have the ability to fix font size sometimes. To make beautiful navigation for example Here it is url removed Not to mention that NN and M won't show the effects I'd appreciate if somebody with IE 5-something could look at it. It probably won't show the effects either or Opera?

I just realized that thesebrowsers don't understand fixed font size! They don't care you wrote "font-size: 10px;" if you click 'Text Zoom' they zoom everything. I wanted to use this fancy DHTML navigational bar thing, but it's ugly and useless if zoom is not 100% What do you do disregard netscapers and mozillers or use another navigation? According to my statistics 4% of visitors are netscapers

ok, I stand corrected the subject didn't grab my full attention, I guess Thanks for the tips! Rock Sign

No, you never know if googlebot used the text from the description tag or from the body because it's their body text as well And how people get listed in Dmoz directory? They never listed anything I submitted although I didn't break any of their rules. They were silly non-commercial sites, so I didn't really care, but anyway...

It's weird, isn't it? It obviously didn’t fail to set up redirections, but willing to show the cool.stufftosee only for a few hours a day... well, to my family at least

Yes, I used cpanel to create sub-domains and it did create folders. Is there any chance it failed to set up redirections? I created a few sub-domains already and none of them works properly.

Thanks! I thought googlebot ignores description tag. At least I've never seen it using it For index file it uses body text, yeah, from narrow left column and it looks like: forum contact the webmaster, etc. And I read somewhere that titles should be as short as possible to let visitors find you searching by site name [title] Isn't it true?

Ah, .htaccess file as of 10/30/03! I got it. Thanks! Rock Sign