Comments on: SEMCompare: Trouble or Savior? http://payperclickjournal.com/sem-compare/03/29/2008/ Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:50:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: David Temple http://payperclickjournal.com/sem-compare/03/29/2008/comment-page-1/#comment-351 David Temple Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:10:57 +0000 http://payperclickjournal.com/semcompare-trouble-or-savior/03/29/2008/#comment-351 I guess they've agreed to eliminate anyonymous reviews but not for those that already wrote one. I guess they’ve agreed to eliminate anyonymous reviews but not for those that already wrote one.

]]> By: Brick Marketing http://payperclickjournal.com/sem-compare/03/29/2008/comment-page-1/#comment-347 Brick Marketing Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:59:11 +0000 http://payperclickjournal.com/semcompare-trouble-or-savior/03/29/2008/#comment-347 Kalena, thanks for the links. You can see the response at <a href="http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2008/03/30/rrreoww-theres-a-cat-fight-over-seo-standards/" rel="nofollow">SEOJ</a>. David, negative reviews can be a problem, but the ones that I saw and that Kalena pointed out weren't not really that bad. Every company, after being in business awhile, will get a few negative reviews. No one can help everyone. The problem is that anonymous reviews aren't really helpful because I can't test the credibility of the reviewer. There should be transparency both ways, not just one way. Kalena, thanks for the links. You can see the response at SEOJ.

David, negative reviews can be a problem, but the ones that I saw and that Kalena pointed out weren’t not really that bad. Every company, after being in business awhile, will get a few negative reviews. No one can help everyone. The problem is that anonymous reviews aren’t really helpful because I can’t test the credibility of the reviewer. There should be transparency both ways, not just one way.

]]>