<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Confidential: 22 Google Laws Leaked</title>
	<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:24:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-78580</link>
		<author>anon</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:53:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-78580</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hey leave Google alone. . . or they will put you out of business.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey leave Google alone. . . or they will put you out of business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The First 4 of &#8216;7 Steps in Courting Google&#8217; &#124; On.eTi.me</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-68503</link>
		<author>The First 4 of &#8216;7 Steps in Courting Google&#8217; &#124; On.eTi.me</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:52:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-68503</guid>
		<description>[...] don&#8217;t forget humour in all of these points before the first [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] don&#8217;t forget humour in all of these points before the first [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-50583</link>
		<author>Chris</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:40:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-50583</guid>
		<description>#14 is retarded. This doesn't happen because of Google being awkward, it happens because people manipulate the SERPs by overusing certain techniques.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#14 is retarded. This doesn&#8217;t happen because of Google being awkward, it happens because people manipulate the SERPs by overusing certain techniques.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yossarian</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-45661</link>
		<author>Yossarian</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-45661</guid>
		<description>Ah just came across this article. Immense. Unfortunatly it is all so true :( Every week a see more and more weird behaviour from Google. I recently got a couple of websites penalised for questionable link building. Yes I know, cut my hands off I am evil. Anyway looking at the state of the SERPs it just takes the piss how many people completely take the piss and get away with it. One example was a big wordpress sponsor, he was penalised, got back in then just started up again. No issues since! Unfortunatly the opposite seems to happen to quite a lot of people and they get penalties for hardly anything. I sometimes think that the whole identifying spam thing is no where near as intelligent as Google tries and make out. They just seem to penaluse a bunch of people and hope the fear of penalties makes people conform to their guidelines.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah just came across this article. Immense. Unfortunatly it is all so true :( Every week a see more and more weird behaviour from Google. I recently got a couple of websites penalised for questionable link building. Yes I know, cut my hands off I am evil. Anyway looking at the state of the SERPs it just takes the piss how many people completely take the piss and get away with it. One example was a big wordpress sponsor, he was penalised, got back in then just started up again. No issues since! Unfortunatly the opposite seems to happen to quite a lot of people and they get penalties for hardly anything. I sometimes think that the whole identifying spam thing is no where near as intelligent as Google tries and make out. They just seem to penaluse a bunch of people and hope the fear of penalties makes people conform to their guidelines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Welch</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-43526</link>
		<author>Martin Welch</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:04:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-43526</guid>
		<description>Haha that's at great post, in fact my favourite of the week I think.  You know more and more I'm seeing people unhappy with the power Google are having in terms of the information they have access to.

There's a court case in England at the moment, the case of the "back from the dead canoeist" (he faked his death to collect the life insurance with his wife).  They have both been found guilty and so some of the details of the evidence have been revealed.  That includes series of emails between them after his "death" and also spreadsheets they used to plan the fraud.  I wonder if they were using gmail and Google Docs and google handed the evidence over...?

Certainly I can recall a case last year I think where someone was convicted of attempted murder of her husband, and one of the pieces of evidence was her internet searches which showed she was researching poisons that couldn't be detected!

Scary stuff really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Haha that&#8217;s at great post, in fact my favourite of the week I think.  You know more and more I&#8217;m seeing people unhappy with the power Google are having in terms of the information they have access to.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a court case in England at the moment, the case of the &#8220;back from the dead canoeist&#8221; (he faked his death to collect the life insurance with his wife).  They have both been found guilty and so some of the details of the evidence have been revealed.  That includes series of emails between them after his &#8220;death&#8221; and also spreadsheets they used to plan the fraud.  I wonder if they were using gmail and Google Docs and google handed the evidence over&#8230;?</p>
<p>Certainly I can recall a case last year I think where someone was convicted of attempted murder of her husband, and one of the pieces of evidence was her internet searches which showed she was researching poisons that couldn&#8217;t be detected!</p>
<p>Scary stuff really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-40703</link>
		<author>Aaron</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:15:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-40703</guid>
		<description>HAha i am new, But I think all these are tru. Especially the BMW one. If it was one of us, im sure it wouldn't work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HAha i am new, But I think all these are tru. Especially the BMW one. If it was one of us, im sure it wouldn&#8217;t work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Khurshed</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-40077</link>
		<author>Khurshed</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-40077</guid>
		<description>Laughed a bit and then sat down and thought a bit and laughed again when i read it again :)
nice article!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laughed a bit and then sat down and thought a bit and laughed again when i read it again :)<br />
nice article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rushabh Choksi</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-40072</link>
		<author>Rushabh Choksi</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-40072</guid>
		<description>Good Shit! Lol..i mean great stuff..though it sounds  humorous but many aspects were true.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good Shit! Lol..i mean great stuff..though it sounds  humorous but many aspects were true.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: onreact</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-39862</link>
		<author>onreact</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:51:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-39862</guid>
		<description>Hey Keegan, if it's so obvious why don't you notice that it's satire? Are the categories "fun" and "bullshit" above the post not enough of a hint? Besides that, what's your problem? I do not talk about all the "free high-quality services" that Google offers because this is a post pointing out the drawbacks of relying on Google. I think it's heart breaking how you attempt to defend this poor little mega-corporation that has been viciously attacked by a "stupid" blogger. You're a real activist! 
If you don't care for democracy, human rights, privacy etc. then just move to China, work for the Chinese wages, say "democracy" a few times and then check out what Google services you'll be able to use in prison.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Keegan, if it&#8217;s so obvious why don&#8217;t you notice that it&#8217;s satire? Are the categories &#8220;fun&#8221; and &#8220;bullshit&#8221; above the post not enough of a hint? Besides that, what&#8217;s your problem? I do not talk about all the &#8220;free high-quality services&#8221; that Google offers because this is a post pointing out the drawbacks of relying on Google. I think it&#8217;s heart breaking how you attempt to defend this poor little mega-corporation that has been viciously attacked by a &#8220;stupid&#8221; blogger. You&#8217;re a real activist!<br />
If you don&#8217;t care for democracy, human rights, privacy etc. then just move to China, work for the Chinese wages, say &#8220;democracy&#8221; a few times and then check out what Google services you&#8217;ll be able to use in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keegan</title>
		<link>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-39830</link>
		<author>Keegan</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 06:59:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://seo2.0.onreact.com/confidential-22-google-laws-leaked#comment-39830</guid>
		<description>ZOMG THE CONSPIRACY OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!

...

Wow. Just... wow. The omission of facts in this rather obviously fake "Google manifesto" is painful.

Don't get me wrong - I'm NOT a fan of monopolies, or Big Brother style tactics. I agree that Google needs to be watched. But when you go out and start ranting about how evil Google is, despite the countless free high-quality services they offer and their rather comprehensive privacy policy (have you bothered to read it recently? My sources point to "No") and many other unarguably good deeds besides, you make yourself out to be a fool. Right on par with the people who swear that aliens are trying to make contact with them through their dog.

Google isn't evil yet. It could become evil, but it isn't at this moment. If you discredit yourself now with stupid things like this, you'll be ignored if/when they really do turn evil, and that would be a shame. Boy who cried wolf, anyone?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ZOMG THE CONSPIRACY OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!</p>
<p>&#8230;</p>
<p>Wow. Just&#8230; wow. The omission of facts in this rather obviously fake &#8220;Google manifesto&#8221; is painful.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong - I&#8217;m NOT a fan of monopolies, or Big Brother style tactics. I agree that Google needs to be watched. But when you go out and start ranting about how evil Google is, despite the countless free high-quality services they offer and their rather comprehensive privacy policy (have you bothered to read it recently? My sources point to &#8220;No&#8221;) and many other unarguably good deeds besides, you make yourself out to be a fool. Right on par with the people who swear that aliens are trying to make contact with them through their dog.</p>
<p>Google isn&#8217;t evil yet. It could become evil, but it isn&#8217;t at this moment. If you discredit yourself now with stupid things like this, you&#8217;ll be ignored if/when they really do turn evil, and that would be a shame. Boy who cried wolf, anyone?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
