<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Rob Hammond - a blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rob-hammond.co.uk/comments/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk</link>
	<description>SEO, Perl, etc</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:43:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Simple meta data bot in Perl by rob</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/simple-meta-data-bot-in-perl/comment-page-1#comment-2031</link>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:43:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=256#comment-2031</guid>
		<description>Hmm good question - not really, just out of habit I guess: makes more sense not to use it as you suggest :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm good question &#8211; not really, just out of habit I guess: makes more sense not to use it as you suggest <img src='http://rob-hammond.co.uk/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Simple meta data bot in Perl by Web Hosting Nuggets</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/simple-meta-data-bot-in-perl/comment-page-1#comment-2030</link>
		<dc:creator>Web Hosting Nuggets</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Aug 2010 17:31:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=256#comment-2030</guid>
		<description>Hi Rob,

Simple but effective article! I was just wondering are there any reasons why you are using the &quot;g&quot; global matching modifier when extracting the description meta data? I am asking because I get better matching results without that modifier...

Greetings</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Rob,</p>
<p>Simple but effective article! I was just wondering are there any reasons why you are using the &#8220;g&#8221; global matching modifier when extracting the description meta data? I am asking because I get better matching results without that modifier&#8230;</p>
<p>Greetings</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 5 SEO Lessons from Mad Men by rob</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/5-seo-lessons-from-mad-men/comment-page-1#comment-2007</link>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 10:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=289#comment-2007</guid>
		<description>try out the google search or the move? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>try out the google search or the move? <img src='http://rob-hammond.co.uk/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 5 SEO Lessons from Mad Men by SEO boy</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/5-seo-lessons-from-mad-men/comment-page-1#comment-2006</link>
		<dc:creator>SEO boy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 04:32:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=289#comment-2006</guid>
		<description>Interesting on Orange...I remember when the company launced &#039;Orange monkey&#039; and realised the top ranking result what a listing from urban dictionary on a related karma sutra move..will let you try it for yourself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting on Orange&#8230;I remember when the company launced &#8216;Orange monkey&#8217; and realised the top ranking result what a listing from urban dictionary on a related karma sutra move..will let you try it for yourself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Cervical Cancer Jab &amp; SEO by rob</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/cervical-cancer-jab/comment-page-1#comment-785</link>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=189#comment-785</guid>
		<description>To be fair to the NHS it appears they have been &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/cervical-cancer-jab-google-fuels-fears/#comment-4979&quot;&gt;at least monitoring the SEO aspects&lt;/a&gt; around this issue.

However, linking to other (more accurate) news sources about the &lt;a href=&quot;http://itn.co.uk/5d070881c3820b6c0412305daf076d73.html&quot;&gt;cervical cancer jab&lt;/a&gt; may also help to dislodge the Mail&#039;s dominance on this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be fair to the NHS it appears they have been <a href="http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/cervical-cancer-jab-google-fuels-fears/#comment-4979">at least monitoring the SEO aspects</a> around this issue.</p>
<p>However, linking to other (more accurate) news sources about the <a href="http://itn.co.uk/5d070881c3820b6c0412305daf076d73.html">cervical cancer jab</a> may also help to dislodge the Mail&#8217;s dominance on this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Cervical Cancer Jab &amp; SEO by Tom hallett</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/cervical-cancer-jab/comment-page-1#comment-782</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom hallett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 12:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=189#comment-782</guid>
		<description>&quot;It’s worth noting that the Mail’s misinformation is directly wasting taxpayer’s money by forcing the NHS to buy Google AdWords to put across the facts.&quot;

Or... the NHS is wasting taxpayer&#039;s money by not looking at SEO as part of their overall marketing strategy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;It’s worth noting that the Mail’s misinformation is directly wasting taxpayer’s money by forcing the NHS to buy Google AdWords to put across the facts.&#8221;</p>
<p>Or&#8230; the NHS is wasting taxpayer&#8217;s money by not looking at SEO as part of their overall marketing strategy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Even Google says Google UK sucks by Robert</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/google-uk-sucks/comment-page-1#comment-779</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=150#comment-779</guid>
		<description>Nothing new really... but then again I&#039;m in South Africa.  Our results are mostly American.  I guess Google reckons if it doesn&#039;t quite get it, just return a US result.  Pity really as they were the best local search provider - now they all suck.  Or wait... bing.co.za here I come!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nothing new really&#8230; but then again I&#8217;m in South Africa.  Our results are mostly American.  I guess Google reckons if it doesn&#8217;t quite get it, just return a US result.  Pity really as they were the best local search provider &#8211; now they all suck.  Or wait&#8230; bing.co.za here I come!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Even Google says Google UK sucks by rob</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/google-uk-sucks/comment-page-1#comment-778</link>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=150#comment-778</guid>
		<description>Yeah it&#039;s totally crazy - we&#039;ve had to put up with some pretty terrible results for around 6 months now. I seem to be getting bad results for at least 1 in 10 searches in Google UK now.

Funnily enough seems to mostly happen on non-commercial search terms in my experience...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah it&#8217;s totally crazy &#8211; we&#8217;ve had to put up with some pretty terrible results for around 6 months now. I seem to be getting bad results for at least 1 in 10 searches in Google UK now.</p>
<p>Funnily enough seems to mostly happen on non-commercial search terms in my experience&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Even Google says Google UK sucks by Robert Nicholson</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/google-uk-sucks/comment-page-1#comment-777</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Nicholson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:03:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=150#comment-777</guid>
		<description>Really good research. I wonder if Google is aware of this? I presume their internal search quality &amp; research teams would. If not... is google getting so big &amp; corporate that the teams are unaware of effects they&#039;re having and are teams not researching user behaviour enough?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really good research. I wonder if Google is aware of this? I presume their internal search quality &amp; research teams would. If not&#8230; is google getting so big &amp; corporate that the teams are unaware of effects they&#8217;re having and are teams not researching user behaviour enough?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Even Google says Google UK sucks by Richard Vaughan</title>
		<link>http://rob-hammond.co.uk/google-uk-sucks/comment-page-1#comment-776</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Vaughan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rob-hammond.co.uk/?p=150#comment-776</guid>
		<description>Lateral thinking man nice spot. The UK serps are officially broken, users are telling us so!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lateral thinking man nice spot. The UK serps are officially broken, users are telling us so!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.699 seconds -->
<!-- Cached page served by WP-Cache -->
