text:
Botanical Description & Habitat
Hydrastis canadensis
Common names
Eyebalm Eyeroot Goldenroot Tumeric root Yellow paint Yellow root
Native to eastern North America, most abundant west of the Alleghenies in Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, and Kentucky. It flourishes in shady woodlands and mountain meadows with rich, soft, damp soils.
Has a rough, wrinkled, yellow root which sends up a hairy, purple stem 8 to 20 inches in height. It bears three to five slightly hairy, five-parted, dark green leaves. A solitary, small, green-white flower appears in May or June, developing on a portion of the stem extending beyond the upper leaf. The flower matures into a bright red berry-like fruit which resembles a raspberry, but is inedible.
Medicinal part
Rhizome and root - dried, collected in autumn
Historical Properties & Uses
Goldenseal is primarily an antibiotic, anti-infectious agent. Physicians of the 19th century were almost unanimous in the opinion goldenseal possessed a variety of therapeutic qualities, including the ability to cure indigestion, nausea, gas, and heartburn (for which the herb still finds application today).
The alkaloids in goldenseal stimulate bile production and secretion, destroy noxious bacteria, increase the tone and responsivity of the gastrointestinal tract, and cure gastroenteritis. These alkaloids, especially berberine and hydrastine, are used to treat a wide variety of infectious diseases. Berberine protects experimental animals from amoebic infectious agents and against cholera. Goldenseal extract is effective against both gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria, as well as against giardiasis.
Goldenseal is hypotensive, anticonvulsant, and antispasmodic; it is a good tonic, generally and for the heart, intestines, and uterus in particular. Use of goldenseal to relieve the nausea of pregnancy has not been objectively investigated, but may be related to the above effects. The herb's use as a styptic is supported by research indicating a hemostatic action; its astringent, antiseptic, and disinfectant uses are related to its antibacterial properties.
Method of Action
Goldenseal action is due partly to presence of berberine. The main active constituents of goldenseal are the alkaloids hydrastiane, berberine, canadine, and berberastine.
It has been estimated goldenseal contains as much, or more, berberine and related alkaloids than does barberry.
Some experts believe, therefore, goldenseal possesses all the properties of barberry, plus others (or the same in higher potency) due to the presence of hydrastine. The potency-enhancing theory gains some support from the observation berberine has pharmacological properties very similar to hydrastine.
Berberine has been shown to possess excellent antibiotic properties against bacteria, amoebae, and protozoa. It has been effective in the treatment of experimental cholera and giardiasis. Berberine has a depressant effect on the CNS and stimulates the respiratory center, the uterus and the bladder. Berberine also has very good choleretic principles.
Goldenseal affects cardio-vascular parameters
Goldenseal extracts have been shown to have strong anticonvulsive properties on isolated uterine and intestinal tissue. However, other studies have found hydrastine itself to be a convulsant, cardiac depressant, and uterine/intestinal stimulant or depressor. Whole plant material would therefore appear to be different from, if not opposite to, this major single component.
The hydrastine-induced convulsions are believed to be of spinal origin. Hydrastine's depressor effect of heart tissue is evident at concentrations as low as 1:500,000 (interestingly, although contractility is decreased, tonus is increased). In sub-convulsive doses, hydrastine causes a temporary fall of blood pressure (due to cardiac depression) and an increase in pulse pressure.
Hydrastine is hypotensive
Hydrastine hydrochloride injected intravenously causes a fall in blood pressure. Hydrastinine, another constituent, appears to stimulate many kinds of involuntary muscles, and causes a rise in blood pressure; however, is inferior to digitalis as a cardiac tonic.
Goldenseal has antispasmodic action
Studies on the sympathetic and spasmolytic properties of goldenseal extract show it is effective in counteracting the spasmodic effects of adrenaline in both guinea pig seminal vesicle and uterus.
This property is greatly enhanced in the presence of small amounts of Secale alkaloids or ergotamine tartrate. Likewise goldenseal extract potentiates the action of those two substances.
Goldenseal extract is hemostatic
Goldenseal extract has been used clinically as an effective uterine hemostatic, but was found to be inferior to ergot in the treatment of postpartum hemorrhage.
Goldenseal has antibiotic action
The herb is effective against Staphylococcus aureus in dilutions of 1000 to 6000; it is also effective against several other gram negative and gram positive pathogens.
Drug Interactions & Precautions
Possible Interactions
The topical application of the astringent herb goldenseal, in conjunction with the acne product tretinoin (retinoic acid, vitamin A acid), may adversely affect the skin.
The anti-inflammatory activity of this herb can be seriously inhibited by phenobarbital and certain other sedatives and hypnotics, such as chloral hydrate and meprobamate. This is also true of beta-adrenergic blocking agents, such as propranolol.
There is evidence to show combining bactericidal and bacteriostatic agents will lower the effectiveness of the bacteriostatic agent. How this finding applies to herbal anti-infectives is still unknown.
Safety Factors & Toxicity
If administered in high doses, any of goldenseal's alkaloids can produce toxic symptoms ranging from mouth irritation, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea to cardiac depression, central nervous system paralysis and death. The use of whole goldenseal, however, has not led to significant toxicity.
There is a widely held, but experimentally unsubstantiated, belief goldenseal causes abortion in the first three months of pregnancy. From an analysis of the components of the herb, there are no indications it should cause abortions.
Popular consumer-orientated books like those from Dr. James Balch: "Prescription for Nutritional Healing" contain the following proviso:
"Do not take goldenseal internally on a daily basis for more than one week at a time, do not use it during pregnancy. Use with caution if you are allergic to ragweed."
Preparation & Administration
Three times a day
Avoid in pregnancy and if hypertensive
Dried tuber
0.5-1 gram
made from 1/4 - 1/2 tsp of dried tuber
Fluid extract
1:1 in 60% alcohol, 0.3-1 ml
1:10 in 60% alcohol, 2-4 ml
Purified berberine
5 mg
Note: This Herbal Preparation information is a summary of data from books and articles by various authors. It is not intended to replace the advice or attention of health care professionals.
Andronescu, et.al., Antibiotic activity of the extract and the alkaloid isolate from berberis vulgaris. Clujul Med., 46(3), 627-631, 1973.
Am Hospital Formulary Service. Am Soc of Hosp Pharm. Wash, D.C.
Bressler, R., M.D. Bogdonoff & G.J. Subak-Sharpe. 1981. The Physicians Drug Manual. Doubleday & Co, Inc. Garden City, NY. 1213 pp.
Chandhoke, N. & B.J.R. Ghatak. Pharmacological investigations of angelicin, a tranquilizing sedative and anticonvulsant agent. Indian Journal Of Medical Research, 63, 833, 1975.
Chan, E. Displacement of bilirubin from albumin by berberine. Biol Neonate 1993;63(4):201-8.
Chan, M.Y. The effect of berberine on bilirubin excretion in the rat. Comparative Medicine East And West, 592), 161-168, 1977.
Chopra, R.N., B.B. Dikshit & J.S. Chowhan. Pharmacological action of berberine. Indian J Of Med Rsrch, 19(4), 1193-1203, 1932.
Clark, T.H., A.H. Conney & B.P. Harpole, et.al. 1967. Drug interactions that can affect your patients. Patient Care, 1(11). pp. 33-71.
D'Amico, M.L. Richere sulla presenza di sostanze ad azione antibiotica nelle piante superiori. Fitoterapia, 26(1), 77-79, 1950.
Emmelin, N. & W. Feldberg. J Of Physiology (London), 106, 482, 1947.
Felter H.W. and Lloyd J.U. King's American Dispensatory Cincinnati, Ohio, 1898. Reprinted 1983. Portland, Oregon: Eclectic Medical Publications.
Felter, H.W. The Eclectic Materia Medica, Phrmacology, and Therapeutics. Cincinnati, Ohio, 1922. Reprinted 1985. Portland, Oregon: Eclectic Medical Publications.
Fitzpatrick, F.K. Plant substances active against mycobacterium tuberculosis. Antibiotics And Chemotherapy, 4(5), 528-536, 1954.
Gilani A.H. and Janbaz K.H. Prevention of acetaminophen-induced liver damage by Berberis aristata leaves. Biochem Soc Trans; 1992;20(4):347.
Goodman, L.S. & A. Gilman. 1975. Pharm Basis of Thera. MacMillan, NY.
Haginiwa, J. & M. Harada. Pharmacolgical studies. V. Comparison of the pharmacological actions of berberine type alkaloid-containing plants and their components. Yakugaku Zasshi, 82, 726-731, 1962.
Hansten, P.D. 1979. Drug Interactions, 4th ed. Lea & Febiger, Phila.
Hyde, F.F. British Herbal Pharmacopoeia. British Herbal Medicine Assoc: West Yorks, England, 1983
Kastrup, E.K., ed. 1981. Drug Facts and Comparisons, 1982 edition. Facts and Comparisions Division, J.P. Lippincott Co, Phila(St. Louis).
Kowalewski, Z., K. Wlodzimierz & I. Mirska. Effect of berberine sulfate on staphylococci. Arch. Of Imm. And Ther. Exp., 20(3), 353-360, 1972.
Kulkarni, S.K., et.al. Pharmacological investigations of berberine sulphate. Japanese Journal Of Pharmacology, 22(1), 11-16, 1972.
List, P. & L. Hoerhammer. 1969-1976. Hagers Hanbuch der Pharmazeutischen Praxis, vols. 2-5. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Martin, E.W. 1978. Drug Interactions Index, 1978/79. J.B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia.
Moore, M. Medicinal Plants of the Desert and Canyon West, Santa Fe: Museum of New Mexico Press, 1989.
Moore, M. Medicinal Plants of the Pacific West Santa Fe: Red Crane Books, 1993.
Mowrey, Daniel B., Ph.D. Exper. Psych., Brigham Young University. Director of Nebo Institute of Herbal Sciences. Director of Behavior Change Agent Training Institute. Director of Research, Nova Corp.
Newnham, R.E. Food Supplement. Us Patent 4440760, April 3, 1984.
Oreshkov, T.M. The effectiveness of the new colertic, berberine. Tr Izhevskogo Med Inst, 21, 120-122, 1964.
Osol, A. & R. Pratt. 1973. The United States Dispensatory. J.B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia. 4000 pp.
Pizzorno, Joseph E. & Murray, Michael T. A Textbook of Natural Medicine. John Bastyr College Publications: Seattle, Wa, 1985.
Poe, C.F. & Johnson, C.C. Acta Pharmacol. Toxicol., 10, 338, 1954.
Preininger, V. in The Alkaloids, Vol. 15, R.H.F. Manske, Ed. Academic Press, New York, 1975, p. 207.
Riesterer, L. & R. Jaques. 1968. Interference by beta-adrenergic blocking agents with the antiinflammatory action of various drugs. Helv Physiol Acta, 26. pp. 287-293.
Sabir, M. & N. Bhide. Study of some pharmacological actions of berberine. Indian J Of Physio And Pharma, 15(3), 111-132, 1971.
Scientific Committee, British Herbal Pharmocopaeia, British Herbal Med Assoc, Lane House, Cowling, Na Keighley, West Yorks, Bd Bd220lx, l983
Stuart, D.M. 1968. Drug metabolism Part 2. Drug interactions. PharmIndex, 10(10). pp. 4-16.
Subbaiah, T.V. & A.H. Amin. Effect of berberin sulphate on entamoeba histolytica. Nature, 215, pp. 527-528, July 29, 1967.
Uhlenbroock, D. Die sympathikolytische wirkung der hydrastis alkaloide. Arzneimittel-forschung, 5(7), 399-402), 1955.
Vartazaryan, B.A. & E.E. Koltochnik. The cholegogic action of berberine. Sb Nauch Tr Vladivostokskii Med Inst., 2(11), 113-115, 1964.
Welch, A.D. & V. Henderson. A comparative study of hydrastine, bicuculline and adlumine.
Hydrastis canadensis
? Southwest School of Botanical Medicine

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Soft Structured Carriers
HosaUSA Chunei Baby Carrier
" I really wanted this carrier to work for us. I am a size 20, and according to the descriptions on the website, the larger size sounded like it would work. I could get my son into the carrier easier than any other carrier I had tried, but the belt would not buckle around my belly. I wore it a few times without the belt and it was extremely comfortable, but I really wanted the..." --Pumpkin_Pie
Scootababy Baby Carrier
" I purchased my Scootababy when my DD got too heavy for me to wear in our ring sling without a lot of neck/ shoulder cramping. It is very easy to use and I can wear her on my hip or my back. The back is high for her long torso. I love it it has been worth every penny. " --HeliMom
BABYBJORN Baby Carrier Active Organic
If you prefer a carrier to a sling, you'll love this organic-cotton version of the award-winning BabyBjorn Active Carrier. This handy device keeps your baby close, frees up your hands, and provides extra lumbar support to help you get comfortably through your busy day.


text:
POCATELLO, Idaho -- Idaho State football coach Mike Kramer has announced that he is not retaining four assistant coaches after the team posted a 1-10 mark and lost all eight of its Big Sky Conference games.
Kramer announced Monday afternoon that offensive line coach Derrick Roche, secondary coach Daniel Drayton, defensive line coach Todd Bates and linebackers coach Rudy Griffin will not be on the staff next season.
Kramer said he wasn't sure if he would be the Bengals defensive coordinator next season.
ISU gave up an average of 55.2 points and 356.6 yards rushing per game, last among 121 Football Championship Subdivision teams on both categories.
Kramer also announced Monday that the school planned to submit a perfect Academic Progress Rate score of 1,000 to the NCAA.


text:
No Results for {0}
Can't find what you are looking for?
Live Chat
Email Us
Store Locator
Please scroll all the way to the bottom and accept.
The discount - it's all yours. Just shop and put stuff in your cart.
Converse Inc. U.S. employees, U.S. based Nike and Nike Subsidiary Employees, along with family members can shop Converse gear at 40% off the published selling price on most products. Design Your Own products receive a 20% discount.Shop Now


text:
School Spotlight
Whether you're on your way to the library or stopping by City Hall, chances are you're driving by St. John Vianney School, located in the heart of Brookfield. This blog will provide insight into life and education at SJV, a 4K-8 educational anchor in Brookfield since 1957.
Second Graders to Receive First Communion This Weekend
Congratulations to all the second graders at St. John Vianney Parish who are making their First Communion this weekend.
Bring Your Aluminum Cans to SJV Next Weekend to Help Make-A-Wish Foundation
As the second graders are treasuring their memories from making their First Holy Communion last weekend, the week ahead is busy as ever at St. John Vianney school.
Then End of the School Year is a Busy Time at St. John Vianney Parish School
The school year may be close to an end, but things are busy as ever at St. John Vianney School. Among the many exciting activities planned, this week, the 8th graders are going to Chicago, the 5th graders are visiting the Historical Society, the 7th graders will tour Madison and the 2nd graders are going to the zoo!


text:
Customer Reviews
There are no reviews for this product yet. Please share your thoughts on this product!
Sending the same ornament to different places? If you order more than one of an item and want them shipped to different addresses, please order them individually. We will ask you for the individual shipping addresses later in the ordering process.
Beach Child Boy Christmas Ornament
Personalized Christmas Ornament
Material: Resin
and credit card.
Ornaments shown on our site are personalized, as examples only, so you can see where we put the words/names you give us. Some ornaments allow you to select hair or uniform color. If there is no color choice, it is not available on that particular ornament. We will do everything possible to catch any mistakes in spelling, etc., but are not responsible if we do as you request, and it is then not correct. The ornament you see above is the way it will look when you get it, except for the personalizing instructions you give us and any optional attributes you select.
Read what our customers say about our Personalized Christmas Ornaments and their shopping experience!
12/11/2011 -"I received the ornaments and they are perfect! Thank you so much for a beautiful product! Betty O. "
11/29/2006 -"I just have to say, that I received my ornaments, and I was soooo pleased. I've never done it on line before, and the handwriting on the ornaments mean everything, and they were done so nicely, so thank you very much for making my experience a great one. Happy Holidays. Laura M."
11/11/2008 -"I received it today and it is BEAUTIFUL. It looks better in person that it does on the website. JOB WELL DONE! Kathleen R."


text:
The Museum is located on Central Park West between 77th and 81st Streets.
All groups enter the Museum through the Rose Center entrance, located on 81st Street between Central Park West and Columbus Avenue.
Pick up your tickets on the lower level of the Rose Center at the WILL CALL DESK located to the left of the staircase.
• By Motorcoach: Enter the 81st Street driveway (between Columbus Avenue and Central Park West). A member of the Museum's transportation department will meet you to coordinate a departure time. Please adhere to the departure time in order to avoid traffic congestion and confusion.
• By subway: Take the B (weekdays only) or C to 81st Street. Unless you already have tickets in-hand, you cannot enter the Museum directly from the subway station. You must exit the station to the street-level and walk around to the 81st Street Rose Center entrance where your tickets will be waiting.


text:
Great stories from the back and front of a taxi cab
Breaking news: Townsville cab driver Mike Caldwell 68, drove a naked man 1500km to Tennant Creek and let his passenger do all the talking?
Hang on a second, does that surprise anyone else? No - not the naked part - the passenger talking bit. Every cab I have ever caught the cabbie has talked my ear off. It's incredible how much information a person can pack into fifteen minutes while driving on Sydney roads. Double that when there's traffic, of course.
That's not a criticism by the way.If you're going to be stuck in a small vehicle with a stranger, why not be entertained? And cabbies have some of the best stories, especially the ones about how they ended up behind the wheel.
All that has set us off in search of some wacky cab stories, and you can check them out below. But what about you, can any of your experiences rival these?
A tale of holiday survival, from our own Tory Shepherd:
We left early one morning to get from Bali across to Lombok and over to the Gili Islands. We just jumped in the first cab that came along; it looked blue-ish, and the blue ones are meant to be the best. Friendly guy. High as a kite. Doof doof. Made it clear straight away I would have to hold the door closed myself. With no seatbelt on. Ah well, part of the adventure, right? On Indonesian roads you need to make a lot of noise, make yourself seen, so horns are used more often than brakes. Driver was cruising through plenty of traffic, beeping people out of the way. Then we realised not only did his doors not close, his horn didn't work. For our benefit alone he was saying 'beep, beep', everytime he swerved around another vehicle. Beep beep. He almost had us fooled. Then his masterful use of the gears made it clear the brakes didn't work either, at which point we opted to get out and hail another car.
Late for the wedding in New York City
If it were not for one taxi driver a few months ago I would not be married. You see, my wedding was scheduled for high noon, and the limo service we had hand picked for reliability was not coming through. While waiting at the church, I got word that my bride to be was stranded because the limo was a no show. However, within a few minutes a taxi pulled up and out came the smiling, beautiful bride to be. In her eyes no limo compared. As I found out later, the cabbie saw her on the curb, stopped and asked if he could help. Excited that he was heading to a wedding, he quickly threw on a tie (why he had one in the cab is mystery), and sped off to the church. He could not have been more helpful and excited. In fact the pictures taken of my wife exiting the taxi, with him helping her to the curb, are the highlights off our wedding photos.
And a surprise delivery in a London cab…
I didn't deliver the baby. The girl did it nearly all by herself in the back seat. I picked her up off the Moss estate to take her to the hospital. She was doing the moaning of a woman in labour, but her boyfriend kept saying, "You've got an hour, you're all right." I said, "You haven't, she's having a baby." So I parked round the back of the doctors' surgery in town, and we got the doctors to come out - we had a big audience by now - but by the time they came out, she'd had it. I remember saying, "I didn't think it would come that quick." She was taken to hospital with her boyfriend, and the doctors went back inside, and I was left with the mess to clean up. Luckily most of it happened on a towel. It could have been much worse. I was chuffed afterwards. I got myself on telly - on the morning news, and at dinnertime on ITV and BBC. It was an experience, without a doubt. You see it on television in America and you think, will it happen to you? And it happened.
Comments close on this post at 8pm AEST
Most commented
hammy says:
I think it's disgusting the taxi driver taking advantage of a man who he admits was mentally disabled , but this is Australia and we celebrate these kind of things these days.
SimpleSimon says:
My friend vomited in her own shoe in the back of a taxi on a business trip. Then, after rinsing it out, had to put the shoe back on her foot. Preeeetty gross. Didn't spill a drop though. #winning
Economist says:
Well I have a fear of taxi cabs. The only car accidents I've been involved in were both in cabs. My story is that I was in the back of a cab and effectively ended up in the front of the cab in a high speed accident that completely squashed the car.
Sinbad says:
There is an amazing story of how a passenger beat up a taxi driver in the past few days in Singapore, see http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20121206-388021.html
Question says:
When in Japan I was out late taking a tour of Kyoto, and decided to catch a taxi back to my Ryokan. Tell you what, them Japanese cabbies dont eff around! When we got to my street I indicated to the driver that I could walk the 100 or so metres to the Ryokan entrance, as the place I was staying at was down a series of long, winding alleyways and I thought the guy would have a tough time driving the car around them (for some reason everything in Kyoto seems to be made of alleyways). Anyway, Cabbie-san was having none of that , and proceeded to drive me to my door. As he trundled the car down the first of the narrow alleys he made to turn left - SKREEEE KTHUNK - off came the wing mirror. "Jesus, do you want to stop?" I asked, only to be waved off as if nothing happened. Next, a right turn and another SKREEEE KTHUNK - off comes the other wing mirror. Again I indicate that this is far enough, and again Cabbie-san waves me off. This continues for a minute or two more, and by the time I get to my destination we're missing large swathes of paintwork on both sides of the car. Amazingly, Cabbie-san gets out, drops off my bags, and when I try to give him a little extra to help him pay for his now FUBAR looking car he flat out REFUSES to accept it, wishes me a good night and drives off with a smile!
Dayum Japan - you crazy!
James1 says:
My oddest taxi ride occurred in Brisbane. I flew in on an early flight from Canberra, and needed to get to the city by 9am so I hopped in a taxi rather than taking the train. The taxi driver had a noticeable mustache, and a slightly less noticeable goatee, and his/her hair was shortish, giving no indication of gender. He/she was overweight, so I could not tell if the boobs were the real deal or manboobs, and he/she was wearing the standard button up shirt and slacks that all taxi drivers seem to wear. I could not tell if this driver was a man or a woman from looking at him/her, so I pegged my hopes on him/her talking at some point.
Unfortunately, when he/she did talk, it was in a relatively high pitched, yet gruff, voice that gave no clear indication. It could have been the voice of a female heavy smoker, or it could have been man with a slightly higher pitched voice. It took everything inside me not to ask if she/he was male or female.
Given that I was travelling for work and needed a receipt, I pegged my hopes on that revealing the first name of the driver. When I exited and checked the receipt, the name was Kerry, which was very unhelpful.
Borderer says:
In a taxi in the right hand lane on the Tullamarine freeway heading into Melbourne. A car comes onto the motorway from an onramp and cuts accross four lanes of traffic and is about to hit our front left tire with their back end. Cabbie sees the approaching car with his peripheral vision, swerves on into the emergency lane, stops the car fishtailing when the back tyre hits loose garvel and rights the vehicle, pulls back onto the road. A collision would have most likely put us into the ditch at about 100kmph and he essentially saw this coming at him from what is supposed to be his blind spot. You sir saved both our asses that day….
Borderer says:
In Perth, get picked up by a cab at my hotel, I'm heading to "The Old Swan Brewery" for dinner, I give the driver the address and after 10 minutes he pulls to the side of the road and them turns on his GPS, types in the restaurant name and then proceeds to the destination… He doesn't know where the destination is, starts driving, gets utterly lost and then turns on the navigation device… I saw red and made him halve the fare, I wouldn't of complained if he had to check a paper map.
hammy says:
It was a late/night early morning in Singapore and I got in the taxi with my boss. En route to our hotel the driver asked us where we were from and I told him Australia, he said he's only ever had one other Australian (about six months ago) in his taxi and he ran off without paying. I asked him how much he lost and he said about $20. About fifteen minutes later we arrived and I paid our fare and then gave him the extra $20 (to his obvious delight) and I told him he now had TWO stories to tell about Australian passengers.
Kika says:
The only one I can think of is when trying to get home urgently one day to attend to a potential disaster I told the cabbie where I lived and off he went. When he started going in a weird direction I kindly asked him which way he was intending to go. He starts blasting me by saying "I know where I am going! I am a taxi driver! Don't you think I know where I am going?"
Um… ok. Yes. Fine. (thought to myself well a lot of you don't!)
And then he proceeded to be shtty with me for the rest of the ride. Geez man. Relax.
sunny says:
In Brisbane at the end of a business trip, running extremely late for my plane and it's peak hour traffic and pissing down. Told the cab driver impassively how much time we had to get to the airport across town and he just went to work - chucked a U turn straight away and went down to another bridge that I'd never seen before, then on the north side though a residential labyrinth of backstreets, gets back on the freeway and starts weaving in and out of lanes with incredible foresight. The bloke would have been the perfect getaway driver he was a genius at his craft. Made my flight in the nick of time (thanks also to the airline staff fast tracking me through the queue) Tipped the cabbie generously but it didn't cover my gratitude or his skill. I don't think I've ever met a bad cabbie.
Frank says:
you got the story wrong….he was half-naked (he was wearing boxers and thongs) and the driver suspects that the reason he was talking so much was due to a mild mental disability…http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/ride-gives-cabbie-fare-of-his-life/story-fndo2iwh-1226534895481
sami says:
Dad was a cabbie for a long while and man, he has some interesting stories! He spent a lot of time driving multipurpose cabs. He prided (that sounds wrong?) himself on being helpful and fair, and became mates with a lot of his disabled passengers as they became regulars.
He laments the dumbing down of so many of today's drivers. 'Back in the day' you had to know every street name, there was no GPS and consulting your map every time would just get ridiculous. He also takes issue with the peak hour taxis and the changes to the industry.
Handy for me these days, if I really want to know the best way to get somewhere or how long it'll take then I just consult him
Pete says:
A trip from Sydney Airport to Sans Souci saw my African driver somehow get on the wrong side of Gen MacArthur Drive, and when I pointed out the cars coming towards us, he laughed and drove over a median strip. He then crazily ended up on the wrong side of another road, at which point I got out, nowhere near my destination. He toted up the fare, and I was too shocked to do anything but pay! The Melbourne experience is usually disastrous: Indian drivers talking on their phone endlessly about god knows what to whom in this sort of 'bubada dubuda' sound, or playing games on their phones. Not to mention the smells and the suspiciously indirect trips. They're poorly paid because of the ripoffs in the industry, peanuts means monkeys are the result. When I hear some of the are doctors or engineers, I thank god we have an immigration system that makes you prove your qualifications before you get here. I avoid taxis at all costs in Melbourne now and get PT everywhere.
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
The Punch is moving house
Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…
Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?
I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…
Advocating risk management is not "victim blaming"
In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…
Nosebleed Section
choice ringside rantings
From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go
Tim says:They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]
From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn't go
Kel says:If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]
Gentle jabs to the ribs
Superman needs saving
Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more


text:
When I first started working in the SEO industry I couldn't understand why "outing" was such a big deal. In fact (like others in the industry) I felt the inability to talk openly prohibited our industry from growing and handling our reputation. However, back then I was naive and inexperienced. I have now seen the damage that "outing" can leave. And because of that I can't keep my opinion on this issue quiet while having a clear conscious at the same time.
Before we get dirty with the details, I want to add a disclaimer: I have absolutely no relationship to any of the entities mentioned in this post. I do not have any relationship to any blog/link network or organized spammer.
By now I am sure that most of you have read about the demise of Build My Rank. When I first read that article, I felt sick (that is not a hyperbole). As an entrepreneur I can't imagine what it must feel like to realize that in a matter of days your company is finished. I don't want to get into the specifics over this incident, but it appears that Google's moves against them were a result of a blog post and ensuing public debate that outed them as a link spammer.
Link spamming is not a viable strategy for SEO. Yes, you can see short term results, but by and large, these services aren't for long term growth. Even though I think these services are a waste of money, I could care less if others use them, as long as they know the full risk involved. Many rave about lobster, but I like crab more, and that won't stop me from having dinner with them.
But the problem with SEO outing isn't just a difference of opinion on strategy. The problem with SEO outing is that no one assumes the full consequences of their actions. Let's take the BMR incident as an example. How much money did they lose as a result of being outed? Do their employees have families? How many of their clients are now seeing revenue lost? How many SEO agencies contracted with them? And how many of their clients are affected? How many innocent business owners that don't know the risk involved with these networks are now suffering? How many people are now on unemployment?
I mentioned in the beginning that I use to not understand why outing was so wrong. What changed my mind, is meeting client after client that has suffered bad SEO advice and has seen a substantial loss. Outing, only exacerbates this process by raising the level of risk.
When people engage in questionable SEO practices they are taking a risk. Many of them know the risk they are taking, but many of them don't. Either way, it's no one's place to make that risk even greater. If your paycheck doesn't say "Google" on it, it's not your job to police the web.
So then what is your job? Your job is to keep a high standard for yourself. Your job is to keep a high standard for those you do business with. Your job is to continue educating the public on what good SEO looks like. That is how we build a better industry. That is how we build a better community. That is how we build a better web. Outing does none of that. What outing does do is create dramatic blog post that allows for the author to take a moral high ground while potentially ruining innocent people's livelihoods. It makes me sick.@joehall on Twitter. Hes a total nut bag over there, but worth a few laughs.
125 Comments
Great post. When I first got into this industry and a few people took me "under their wing" so to speak, this was something that was instilled in me from the start. So I have always been against it.
On the flip side, I know a few companies and individuals in this industry that have made their careers and built up their companies on outing stuff to the public. I'll just let you guess who I am talking about, because I don't out people for outing
Dead on. The exact same thoughts have been on my mind this past week.
What is the blog post that "outed" them?
Rand, you're missing the point (although I can see why you'd be nervous given your site's "body" count in the outing department).
This could just as easily have been written about the New York Times' outing pieces etc.
I couldn't agree more Joe, in fact though I would go further and say that as SEO's we should be ethic-less, that is, it is not our responsibility to determine or influence the ethics of another company, whether it's a client or a competitor. If my client wants to do something unethical with their business, or take a completely spammy route, my only responsibility is to inform them of the risksm after that I can choose to take the job or not and that is the sum total of my action. We are not the internet police, or the marketing police, we are implementers of a technique and technology and should accept that and move on.
I think if someone dug deep enough into these "outings" you would see some kind of financial motivation for one of their internal clients, that they cloak in a "good for the industry" argument.
I think you'd be assuming incorrectly for some of those
This is such a gray issue. Know why? Because I firmly believe MOST SEO's have a dirty little secret they keep in their back pocket in case of emergencies for ranking purposes. Everyone pushes the envelope because, and let's be serious here, natural anchor-text links are a myth. They're hugely overvalued and near impossible to get naturally.
So yeah, the BMR people got burned. And yeah, it sort of sucks that they were outed. But at the same time, that axe was going to fall hard eventually, so this sort of only expedited the process.
I do see your point – but I'm conflicted on this.
Do you want the industry to close ranks and protect the spammers? How does that help the industry as a whole?
In other professions great effort is taken to out dirty practise; whether it's in medical, legal or "something less serious". The building trade, for example, works hard against cowboy builders.
I accept your point about protecting jobs. Perhaps a big difference is in those spammers who simply use their own sites and those spammers who are appointed as SEO for someone else's site. Who's job is at risk in the latter scenario? It's the spammer risking someone else's job. Shouldn't the industry take a firm stand against that?
Who gets to define spammers? Who does the due diligence on all areas of the SEO? Are we all going to be investigated equally? Unless there is an answer to those questions, outing is not a just process
Surely it's Google (or Bing, etc) who defines spammers? Outing doesn't work if Google doesn't agree that it's spam.
My point is that unless there is an impartial body with defined criteria and the rights and resources to investigate the practices of all SEO's equally, there is no justice to outing. It is played by people who have a single knife to dig, and I know (and I do mean know) of many practices that could be outed being done by many SEO agencies who will never be outed because they are liked in the community.
I agree, except that Google/Bing et al are that impartial body.
Outing an individual, assuming Google agrees and takes action, will negatively impact everyone using more or less the same spammy technique, not just the firm 'outed' as Google tends to look for algorithmic solutions to tackle recognised spam issues. The various Panda updates are pretty extreme examples of this, but several minor algo changes happen each day often to filter the effect of certain patterns of activity.
One would not even have to 'out' a spam technique publicly. There are ways to report what you think are spam activities directly and anonymously directly to Google.
In the sense that spam is tackled algorithmically, I think the playing field is level. It's all down to a) how much risk you are happy taking with long term strategy, and b) how comfortable you are making enemies of your competitors.
I did say I was conflicted. I was once pro-outing but having seen the mess the "false" outing of Unruly and impact the self-righteous had; I was put off.
That said, I do understand Google's published guidelines and it is certainly possible to tell when someone is ignoring those. When an SEO agency emails one of my blogs, asking for a link and offering money then I don't think it needs an independent adjudication panel in place to determine that they're buying links.
Who lets Google publish the guidelines? I see comments about "Google-approved SEO". I think that's over-thinking it. Google can try and enforce whatever they want in order to maintain their index. People can push ahead with Yandex-safe SEO if they want.
Saying 'if your paycheck doesn't say Google on it…' is like saying "If your paycheck doesn't say 'Police Department' on it, it's not your job to report a crime." The police can't be everywhere, and imagine what society would be like without 911. The same holds true with Google and the internet.
And in terms of putting peoples' families at risk, doesn't the "outing is immoral" position equate with putting honest businesspeople (and their families) at risk by sitting on our hands while spammers knock them out of the top 10? Either way you're putting livelihoods at risk, might as well be the people making the internet more mediocre.
"If your paycheck doesn't say "Google" on it, it's not your job to police the web."
Makes you wonder who stands to gain from these outing posts. I suppose if you sell something that benefits from a purely Google-approved approach to SEO….
Although that post you pointed out on SEOMoz wasn't one of my favorites, for a host of different reasons, not least because some of the information in it wasn't accurate at all and it just seemed to be a plug for this tool, those networks were in trouble before that post. Also, do those networks add any value to the SERPs? If you are dependent on those networks for your job, then perhaps you are in the wrong profession, if you are an SEO agency using those for your clients, then you deserve to go out of business, if your SEO agency has gotten you penalized for using those networks, that's Google's fault for allowing s**t like that to work and then to penalize businesses who jump on the gravy train because they are told too.
I don't agree with outing either, but if the SEO world want to distinguish themselves from spam, then perhaps trying to highlight Google's flaws in a public forum shows not every SEO has bad intentions. The fact of the matter is, outside of our SEO world, more and more companies are equating SEO with Spam. The fact Google is bringing out a new penalty against "Overly SEO", doesn't help to distinguish the two in the average joe soaps mind.
And there are a couple of big IM'ers who own a number of those big networks and they deserve to be outed, as they are pimping out a pile of s**t to newbies, taking their cash and then getting their sites spanked. Instead of admitting they have been caught with their pants down by Google, they spin up another network, under a different name and start the process all over again. I don't think the online world is going to miss these services unless they are making no effort to actually create value.
Obviously you're not a huge fan of mine. That's okay. It's worth noting that I did answer the questions you posed in the comments regarding perceived inaccuracies of my SEOmoz post. If you want to hash it out more in private, you're welcome to email me or DM me on Twitter (I already follow you).
As for your claim that the post was too promotional of the tool I built, read through the comments. You'll see that the post was originally written without a publicly accessible tool. At the prompting of some people I respect in the search industry, I put together a front end and made the required database changes to accommodate other users. I don't charge for the tool and actually lose money (admittedly not a ton) making it available to other people.
I'm never comfortable with 'outing' as it's quite a negative way to go about your business.
That said there are a number of counter arguments to the "people losing their jobs" line of reasoning.
Firstly, those jobs exist for company A who have succeed by darker in the greyhatsphere than company B, but those jobs may well have existed for company B if company A hadn't leant so far to the dark-side in the first place. What Google has done has worked to apply what it thinks is it's best guess at what it's users should see when they search. Whether that favours company A or company B is up to Google to judge. They should offer best value to their users and their customers (advertisers).
Secondly, Google owes no website a living, and any website that relies on Google for it's business model has too many eggs in too small a basket. Yes good ranking in Google can sky-rocket your revenue, but it could all turn sour tomorrow for all sorts of reasons. Diversify or die!
Businesses need to stop treating Google a gifthorse, and make sure they have good mitigation plans. Build My Rank seem to be offering full refunds, which suggest they stockpiled cash reserves for this eventuality. If so, that's great.
Realistically though, if my business makes unfair advertising claims and your competing business suffers as a result, would you complain to the authorities (ASA in the UK, not sure in the US?). I view this as more or less equivalent. If you suffer unfairly at my hand, I need to be prepared for you to complain, and vice versa.
That said, as I stated, I'm not comfortable with the negativity around 'outing' but I can understand why it happens. Ultimately though, those that made money on the back of a grey-or-blackhat technique should appreciate that they had a good run while they did, not complain that Google have acted to apply their ToS better. Those grey-or-blackhat sites are taking someone else's job in the first place. It's the circle of life.
I've been thinking for a while now… What is actually wrong with (consensual) webspam? I mean, ignoring Google's obvious objections. How and why does it make *your* life worse?
Maybe I'm not doing the right searches but I've never had a splog served up to me in the natural results, I only ever see them as part of backlink research. But Google still seems to reward links from them (in spite of what they'd like us to believe), so why the hell NOT take advantage of that fact? All this talk about "clogging up the internet" is crap, it's not like there's a finite amount of space to go round.
really? You apparently don't do as much searching as some of us do. I find so much crap in SERPs it makes my eyes water as they end up glazing over entry after entry of worthless muck. If even a small fraction of the billions of searches result in that, the end result waste of human time, business resource time, personal time is epic.
"You apparently don't do as much searching as some of us do."
Apparently not. What are you spending so long searching for? How far down the SERPs are you having to look to find the crap?
If Google is actually serving up that crap in its results (not that I'm seeing it – could the fact that I primarily use Google UK have something to do with that, maybe?) then it is failing in its most basic of functions… hard to blame the spammers for that, really.
I'm talking first page results, above the fold. Answers to life questions, and general business (not SEO specific) related questions, on a range of topics.
The specific example of outing that was provided isn't the point. The same point could be made about any number of outing posts.
Most people know using tactics that Google doesn't approve of is a risky move. But that doesn't mean outing them (thus increasing the risk level exponentially) is an acceptable action.
To borrow an example from a previous conversation Joe and I had on this topic, walking along the edge of a cliff is a risky thing to do. You know it and I know it. If I walk up and push you over the edge, is it ok because you were knowingly engaging in risky behavior? Of course not!
The other major issue I have with outing sites is that there's absolutely no proof of guilt required. I could easily throw 1,000 links at Joe's site and then out him by highlighting his link portfolio. If I were able to get my 'outing' post on a widely popular website or in a high profile newspaper, Joe's site would likely suffer serious consequences, even though Joe did absolutely nothing wrong.
Hi Joe.
I think the biggest issue with outing is the righteousness. Who can say what is "ok" and what is not? Who as the authority to draw a line that says "this is ok" and "this is not"? Only Google. So if someone tests the limits, why do some self-righteous jerks feel it is okay to make public statements that the work is "wrong"?
In the case of Rand, clearly he does it for money. He runs a community site and sells instructional info and tools to people who are learning SEO. Controversy, including "hey look what they're doing" pays off for Rand's company, especially when it builds buzz. Polarization also pays off, as does a public image of "transparency" (true or not) as well as a public image of "caring about the industry" true or not.
As for blog writers on SEO topics, everyone is young and naive at some point. Hopefully everyone is on a path to more wisdom. Now, at what point to they become "enlightened"? I mean, at what point is THEIR OPINION actually correct? Does anyone actually ever know?
No. So until then, keep your judgments to yourself, and stop hurting the people who stress the limits in order to better themselves and acquire wisdom.
I have no doubt the outing was that blog post. It specifically mentioned the company and a quick Goolging of the author at that time produced a ranking article (probably an affiliate link thing) promoting the service as good and reporting that it was working well for him.
I love that you didn't mention the seomoz site until Rand stopped by and pressed you to mention it. I probably would have still not mentioned it, since it's plain as day to me Rand is monetizing the community through polarization and controversy.
This is a little off the topic of outing but do people participating in membership-only link networks truly believe that Google can't have someone join that network for the purposes of uncovering what sites are in the network? If I were Matt Cutts, that's what I'd have people doing to weed these things out. It's not like they don't have the budget to buy the links themselves and uncover where they come from. I'd expect that all link networks are on Google's radar this year and that you are going to see a lot more BMR's in the near future.
I don't out sites, but let's be a little realistic. The SEOmoz post mentioned a site that had already been burned, not one that was still generating income. Expect sites like this to get burned by Google quicker in the future. I've been saying for a while that if you want to use link networks like this for short term gain and can make an ROI, go for it, but if you think that this is a viable or sustainable strategy going forward, you are kidding yourself. Those days are rapidly going away. I know a lot of SEOs, affiliates, and lead gen folks will bemoan that fact as it's been relatively easy to make money using that tactic for the last 10 years or so. Wishing for it to keep working in the future won't make it so. If you use link networks, or work for a link network, you'd better see the writing on the wall and figure out what's going to work going forward, because this ain't it. These things are like print media, you can work there, read them, love them, etc. but if you think they aren't going away, you're operating with blinders on.
We can talk about outing until we are blue in the face, but let's be realistic, it isn't going away as there is too much money at stake. The site mentioned in the post ranked #2 for "car insurance" and did it in a way that made the site totally vulnerable. Do you actually think that the sites in position3 and 4, whose traffic has been hit by the thin site ranking, aren't going to out it? As SEOs we'd better figure out how to get sites to rank without making them vulnerable to spam reports because I absolutely guarantee you that as more site owners learn how to do basic competitive research (something that top SEOs train them to do at every single search conference, BTW) you're going to see more and more spam reports…so make a site that isn't vulnerable to a spam report. If that's too hard, don't complain when it gets burned, just move on.
Although I have a developed knowledge-base in SEO, I am not an SEO, I'm a Marketing Director who also deals with issues like PR, branding, and marketing against competitive products.
So from this perspective, my take on the idea of 'outing' in the SEO world is the equivalent of speaking negatively or spreading negative information about a competing brand. In marketing, talking bad about your competition is just something you don't do or even need to do.
I think the same would be true in SEO, you really don't need to 'out' to do what you do or provide value to your clients and the SEO community as a whole.
David, that's the main reason I don't "out" and to be fair, the original article didn't really out the specific site, as Google had quite rightly already penalized it. What I think most people are objecting to is outing in general, and the fact that drawing attention to the site that had been penalized also drew more attention to the link network that it was using to rank.
Agreed, Rob. I read the SEOMoz article in question when it was published, and while I don't think it was intended to 'out' the site or the link network, I believe there are better ways to communicate a point or introduce a tool.
You actually trust Google to police the web? HA! That's where all the problems with SEO lie. You know they reinforce this whole system, right? — it makes them a LOT of money.
The only people that waste their time "outing" sites and techniques are the ones that are losing in the SERPS. Crybabies.
I agree. I just think that you'd better build your site expecting that those people will out you or file a spam report. Don't turn into one of those crybabies if your site gets hit and deserves it. Make it immune to spam reports and outing, or move on to the next partial match domain that you are going to push with spammy links and make sure you get a positive ROI before that one gets hit, and so on…
I meant the crybabies that don't know anything about SEO so look for any reason to tear apart a single site so they can gain ONE spot in the rankings. Outing is NOT an SEO technique.
>> Outing is NOT an SEO technique.
Nope. It's part of the negative SEO toolset. Like throwing a shitload of low-life links onto your best selling pages and then alerting the almighty Google of your unnatural link profile.
Nice to read. Comments, of course, even better. However one question still remains: How the heck do you 'respected' seo folks can spend such a huge amount of time with whining?
I'm going to state the obvious very briefly. Apologies to those who've heard it a gazillion times.
Outing contributes to SEO FUD
SEO FUD helps create more dollars for Google.
If spend on SEO tactics generally can be reduced through the smearing of the concept, then for Google it's a good thing.
The over optimisation things is a good example of this in action – panicky marketing managers might decide to dial down SEO efforts and spend more on adwords to retain visibility. Buying links with Google is the best and safest form of link buying.
Who pays? The consumer.
Products cost more to market, costs are passed on to consumers.
Every now and then we see a little SERP whackamole and someone wins as someone else dies. Google always wins though.
If a company has a defined budget pot for online spend and less of that pot is spent on SEO then the money left might be funnelled towards more adwords spend especially if Google visibility is a priority.
Google love all this. The SEO community is it's own worst enemy time and time again, it raises the tired old concept of bought links, blog links, paid posts etc yadda yadda. Google is the winner every single time.
Damn, I seem to be repeating myself.
They could just quietly nullify the impacts of such purchases but they seldom do.
Panic and terror work best.
Outing helps no one but Google
Meh. When I was a kid and I complained to my mother about something that one of my siblings had or did, I was pretty much told to suck it up. (Not in those exact words – at least, not till I was eight or nine. My mom is take-no-prisoners). I got the strong impression that success depends on focusing inward (what can *I* do) vs outward (what are *they* doing).
I don't care for outing, not because of its morality, but because it's not worth my notice or my time, other than for curiosity's sake. For one thing, nobody ever promised fair, and it's a fool who expects it. For another thing, there are no laws (despite Google's notions to the contrary). For a third thing, there are much better uses for one's time: learn from the (perceived) miscreants, either to copy their success or defend against it, work on your skills and properties to surpass it.
As we were saying on twitter, I've never seen one single 'out' that wasn't either financially motivated, or some kind of ego thing, or just plain whining. Let's not fool ourselves. Nobody's doing it for altruism.
Thanks for the post. Here's my take on it: yes, it's terrible that BMR (and other companies) get put out of business, and loss of jobs, etc. But they are fully aware of the way they position themselves in the market, and if your business is founded on tactics that go against Google's TOS, then you have to know that this is a likely scenario. Still, I agree that outing bad SEO is just something that should be avoided, but I think that the companies that spend time/money on these types of business models need to understand and acknowledge the risks.
Excuse the imperfect analogy but it's like when someone commits crimes to make a living. Once they get caught, they leave their job, leave their family behind, etc., but all along, they knew that was an inherent risk.
That said, there are plenty of competitors who will out you if they get the chance. If Google has shown us anything, it's that there's no thing as a "level playing field" when it comes to SEO, so too many people are willing to out sites because it's every person for himself or herself.
Thanks for getting the discussion started, it's definitely going to stay a hot topic in the near future.
Great post and thanks for being so frank and honest. The fact that you nofollow and noindex this post is a real boost to the credibility. Thanks for keeping the conversation alive and yes there needs to be more good press about the positives of SEO and the industry because there are many great people doing great things for their companies and clients, and yet, we mostly hear about the bad things because they get more traffic, and not the good things that are being done each day.
A company knowingly, intentionally, and passionately provides a service that is known to be in direct opposition to providing long term best practices solutions. It's not just ONE of the services they offer, giving their clients a choice, based on risk. It's their ENTIRE business model. They either know full well the risk they took on in creating the business model, or they failed to perform even the most rudimentary of proper business due diligence from day one.
Regardless of how their business became a target of Google, the fact is they got shut down. To point fingers at one particular potential cause, without truly knowing the facts behind THAT is itself no better than the very target of your article Joe. And in fact, it's worse, because no innocents were harmed in this situation. Except the families of the very people who knowingly set up a doomed to fail business.
To cry foul regarding "outing" is an old and worn out tactic that has mostly been used by companies that don't want their own business targeted. Or people who think polluting the web with crap is perfectly acceptable. If you honestly don't care about the web in general, Joe, then I'd say you are also keeping a blind eye to both the reality that it's always going to be a target of search engines and more and more asshats will fall regardless of whether they're "outed" or not.
Google should never manuly remove websites it should be an algorithm that removes it. This makes it fair. They should take those outings only to change their algorithm. Afterall isnt that what they are all about, or at least they ought to be. If Google cant do it with their algorithm they are simply playing favorites and not doing their job. Thus Google is the unethical one.
That's a big part of this whole mess of a topic. Google is clearly not a disinterested neutral party, and therefore cannot by definition, be considered a true arbiter. Unfortunately, they are the arbiter, with their own financial motives, and for now, at least, we're stuck with that reality.
At the same time, it's also just as flawed a notion to think it okay for Google to allow a known bad site to remain polluting the index until the algorithm can be changed, which could literally be months in the making. Manual action, while not always perfect in execution, is often needed in any clean-up process that involves so many moving parts.
The bullshit parents use about children being tattle-tales is based on a deeper flaw in parenting – the unwillingness for parents to insist a fair process for their children to take responsibility for their actions. It's that very societal norm that fosters a "turn the blind eye", "stop whining" mentality that itself is really a cop-out for communities of professionals who are unwilling to take responsibility for self regulation.
I've said it before and it still applies. If we as a community don't find ways to deal with at least some aspects of this, politicians who have no grasp of reality at all, will.
Personally I've only gone after a very few select companies I've felt have egregiously used truly deceptive business tactic to fool their prospective clients. If others wish to actually do some serious legwork to show their case, and Google then looks closer at that, so be it. I can't honestly recall a situation where a company was outed, they then claimed innocence, and then eventually their site wasn't restored. Not at least any that actually were innocent.
Anyone outing another site isn't "self regulating" they're trying to embarrass Google into regulating that specific site.
If the only repercussions of being outed were a dinged reputation in the SEO community (the only place we can self regulate) that would be a whole different story. Instead people outing others are complaining loud enough to get Google to take an action their algo doesn't already handle.
You mention fairness, but why should one site who has been outed be treated differently than another site that hasn't? If the algo doesn't handle it, it's not our place to force other sites to adhere to even higher standards.
I've been on the no-outing bandwagon for soooo very long. Not even sure it's worth repeating what others have said very well above, such as Ben Cook's analogy "walking along the edge of a cliff is a risky thing to do. You know it and I know it. If I walk up and push you over the edge, is it ok because you were knowingly engaging in risky behavior? Of course not!"
But for me, it boils down to 4 words.
Karma. Stones. Glass houses.
"If your paycheck doesn't say "Google" on it, it's not your job to police the web."
How about if I…
1) Like _using_ Google and getting content that earned its place?
2) Am competing for rankings legitimately?
Why is it exactly that Google owes you a free lunch?
Way to get the SEO community tied up in knots, Joe!
My $0.02 …
I just don't think that SEOmoz post took down BMR. By the time it was published, Google had been sending out notices to webmasters for several weeks via Google Webmaster Tools saying that they detected unnatural linking. (The earliest account I read of one was 2/24.) Even though many sites hadn't even been penalized, let alone de-indexed, site owners were instructed to submit a reconsideration request. I know of one site that had organic traffic from Google moving up and to the right when they received the notice. I was mystified about these instructions until Barry Schwartz broke the story a couple days later about the notices, which he thought were Panda notifications at first (http://bit.ly/zE7zz8).
But in that reconsideration request are these instructions: http://bit.ly/H0Afnj. I think Google flushed out blog networks like BMR and Linkvana from the frenzied confessions of scared webmasters, wanting to demonstrate good faith, not by reading a blog post. The whole sting op played out like an Episode of Law & Order.
That said, I've seen sites lose rankings b/c of participation in link networks long before BMR went belly up. Not b/c Google knew they were all coming from BMR but b/c if you churn out 150 articles in a month that have three variations of anchor text (if that), you suffer from an algorithmic death wish. And that's what a lot of the content on these blog networks is – low-quality, highly spun, easily detected Panda light snacks.
"By the time it was published, Google had been sending out notices to webmasters for several weeks via Google Webmaster Tools saying that they detected unnatural linking."
yep! it's a service also called : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
Considering how un-informative are the messages sent from google, if i should sent a threatening letter to somebody, i'd probably get arrested.
A friend of mine received on of those "friendly warnings" because he own a web directory: somebody submitted a website and then built some links over the listing.
The message was very un-informative so he had to spend some time to understand what happened: it took weeks to get an answer from our benevolent goo(d)gle and even more time to analyze the nature of the links.
I expect google to protect its indexes, but this kind of situation is, in my opinion, not a good example of ethical behaviour.
Excellent post Joe. You hit the nail on the head!
All the best,
People that get into the sort of risky business like BMR are aware of the consequences that getting found out by Google can have. I think it is a calculated risk they've taken on, and there's no reason to feel sorry for them.
For unaware customers who get caught in the crossfire because some shitty "seo" firm convinced them to sign up with them, and are using methods like BMR to rank their clients, that's a different story.
I do feel sorry for them, and I think that the more online exposure and information is available regarding these issues, the more people will "be saved" in the end. (I see your point about noindex, but I think everyone should be able to find posts like this for educational reasons most of all).
Some good thoughts in the comments here…
Small Business owners are the first ones to check what they are spending their money on. It's just a simple search query which can avoid them making this mistake. The information is out there, Google lays down the law for their search engine results and there's really no way anyone can say: I didn't know, I'm the victim here.
Just take 5 minutes on searching what you are about to do and what you're about to spend your money on is all you need to say: NO, we will not do this. This is too risky.
And I agree with what Chris Topher says. By the way, SEO is a sport and doping is not allowed
While I agree that small biz owners are the first ones to check where they are spending their money, if they believe that a firm is going to help them with SEO they probably won't take the time to go through all the dos and don'ts. They usually don't have the time and if they really aren't versed in how search engines work at all, they won't understand it.
I don't really think it's 'immoral'… businesses that rely too heavily on one source of income (which effectively is Google in this case) are playing a high risk game. If you don't work on spreading your investment, market shifts can always come to bite you.
Oh Great! We have been building up our portfolio over the last few years and have kept away from actively involved with the employement of SEO consultants and companies, simply because we dont know what backlinks they would give us for our money and quite simply I fear the thought of them applying any 'Black Hat' practises. So here we are now with a simple strategy of building up our own backlinks and actively involved with Blogs and article writing.
Does this now mean that we are likely to be penalised for our actions? Some companies out there have well in excess of 250,000 backlinks and we are merely the 'worker ants' with only a few hundred.
If the likes of Google decide to 'oust' the practice who will that leave on the first page of Google??
Pingback: BMR was Shut Down Due To Post At SeoMoz?
With BMR's tactics well known it may have been just a matter of time until Google caught up with them. If they weren't "outed" now and continued to grow then more honest business owners may have been unwittingly caught up in this. As such the outing may have actually saved many who wouldn't have known what they were getting involved with from being burned in the future.
When worrying about the impact on the "innocents" the OP isn't taking into account the fact that many honest business owners who weren't using BMR may have been struggling against rivals who were. The outing will negatively impact some sites but positively impact others therefore the net result to society may be neutral.
Should we be feeling bad for those honest business owners that have been caught up in this now or should we be feeling bad for those that struggled or didn't survive in the past because their site was ranking behind a competitors site with an advantage provided by BMR?
Some would suggest that not outing SEO is immoral. Should those that know better sit idly by and let innocents get dragged into something they are not aware of or should they speak out and try and clean up the tarnished image of this industry?
I am constantly fascinated by the mentality of people that feel the need to police the internet based on the guidelines set out by a for profit company. Would these same people turn in a company that posted pink fliers on telephone poles if Walmart said only red ones were acceptable? Do these same people also stand up and rage against the arbitrary guideline changes Google hands down from on high? Using rel canonical vs rel=next/prev changes for example.
Or is this simply a case of those guys are beating me and I don't think it's fair that they can?
Sigh, outers…. While I agree that no blog network met their doom by being in the post discussed here, the actual site that was outed is much more of an issue to me (anytime a site is outed I take issue with it).
All you people shrugging it off stating that Google had already "dealt" with it (at least one person in this thread used the word de-indexed)….WTF are you talking about???
1. The site is still indexed in Google (and Bing).
2. It's still ranking, not like it used to but still ranking top 20 for several queries.
Give me one good reason to out someones business when you're armed only with an interpretation of a violation against a guideline produced by a company you have nothing to do with?
Why is ok to expose and endanger (yes, endanger since the site in this case still ranks, and have you never heard of sites recovering from link devaluation or a penalty?) an unknown person's income, just on your own subjective interpretation of a measly GUIDELINE (NOT LAW!!!) violation? Do you people out others in the real world for not following un-written rules of society….do you print flyers and post all over your neighborhood with someones picture on it saying "This person chews with their mouth open!!!"?
You want to protect users against manipulated results? Well, in this case that argument doesn't work either since the sites replacing the outed site is offering the exact same service, which is what users want for most queries it ranked for. Also, those who claim to want to expose sites for the greater good of the world, why don't you get off your high horse right now OR start outing sites day in and day out 24/7 if you want a somewhat scalable solution so you can indeed save the world for the rest of us.
I agree that outing others is wrong, but the SEO industry needs validity. Discussion is necessary to uncover methods and tactics that work because SEO is more marketing now than it was in the past. If I read the posts by Eppie and this one, Rand had nothing to do with the article's composition only the fact that he published it on the Moz. It's a stretch to blame Rand or the Moz for the fact that Eppie mentioned BMR one time in his article as an example of a blog network. It wasn't exposing business practices but techniques used. Secondly, he made mention of several other networks that have the same business model. No one outside of BMR and Google knows why their sites were "de-indexed" (more of a de-valuing), but I have faith (cause I have to) that Google did so out of concerns for content/link value. The new discussion has begun, and it's about outing bad SEOs and whether we are allowed to discuss tactics used in the industry. In the end we are all working to rank within the business model of the search engines.
The difference between 'outing an SEO' and 'outing' in other industries? Other industries don't sit on the internet bitching all day, they don't write about each other and they don't often see the work of their peers.
Whatever is said in this blog post, and the hundreds of others, won't make any difference to whether people out, spam or anything else.
I don't remember who made the analogy above about medical malpractice, but I agree with Rick that it's a horrible offense to *know* a doctor is screwing up patients, but then decide to stay quiet about it. How does that help ANYONE except for the shady doctors.
I'm all for outing. Yes, in the short term, innocent (and not innocent) businesses will be hurt, but you can rebuild, and hopefully on a more level playing field, with less dirty methods used for trying to rank.
Joe, I don't think you're uncaring about the web or anything, but Alan is definitely right in an overall sense about it:
"To cry foul regarding "outing" is an old and worn out tactic that has mostly been used by companies that don't want their own business targeted. Or people who think polluting the web with crap is perfectly acceptable."
Except no one is being hurt by using SEO techniques that Google doesn't like. The algo is treating all sites the same.
I'm not sure I see how "outing" spammers is immoral? You seem to argue that it's immoral b/c some people lost their jobs. Yeah, sure maybe.. but they were breaching the Google Terms of Service and funneling traffic away from other companies who were trying to do things the right way. Think of how many people those companies could have hired with that traffic instead. Spam really is a zero sum game. When one company gets the high ranking and the sales.. someone else isn't. If the spammers stop getting the clicks and the subsequent sales.. someone else will. And now I hope it's someone who's trying to do things the right way.
Plus, with your logic.. If I knew a local politician was funneling money into his "pet projects" I shouldn't say anything. I wouldn't want those people to lose their jobs. Right?
Just my 2 cents. Glad to be a part of this discussion among such a great community of people
SEO is dead.
I am not so sure. Firstly, for every website that has lost rankings due to relying on link networks (whether knowingly or not) another website will be there in the index. There are still 10 organic results on the first page of Google (give or take). So yes, some people may lose their jobs, just as with the Panda updates, but others will get jobs as a result, and some small struggling businesses may start to do better as a result.
As for outing, if you see a website slide down the SERPs and the reason is because professional spammers are using all manner of tools to spam their way to the top (link networks being just one of the methods used) then why not "out" them? If you were running a restaurant and found out a direct competitor was up to no good, would you ignore it and let them continue steal your customers? Probably not.
For many people the internet provides their business with a valuable source of income. They do their best to rank well through real, natural SEO and the deserve to be ranked higher.
Any form of link manipulation to get better search positions is on the Google radar at the moment. Social and page quality are the future. Links are losing value, at least, the cheap and sleazy ones are.
If outing is immoral because it deprives the top-one ranker of their income, jobs, etc.—then aren't they equally culpable for depriving a legitimate top ranker of exactly the same?
It seems that the only difference is that white-hat SEO has a more positive impact on the web: it works if you have good content, and promote it to people who care. Gray-hat SEO doesn't have the same dynamic; there is no way the web is a better place because someone's buying sidebar links or spinning articles.
Obviously, nobody has an obligation to make the web nicer. And Google has done a masterful propaganda job of making black-hat SEO look immoral to outsiders. But the argument against outing seems to work equally well as an argument against spamming in the first place.
Other industries do not work this way. Would a plumber get mad that someone disclosed his competitor's shoddy work? Have you ever heard a good chef flip out about the local Denny's getting shut down by the health inspector? It's fine to think Google is abusing a monopolistic position, but that doesn't mean that everything bad for Google is good for everyone else, or even good at all.
Drug dealers support their families from their trade. Many have staff. Their clients may not be aware of the full risk of doing business with them. Let's not "out" them – that's immoral. That's the job of the DEA.
There's an old saying in marketing that states, "visibilty = credibility".
SEO's build links to create visibility. Rand supports outing to generate visibility. Google takes down link networks to protect and enhance their visibilty. Coke advertises on American Idol for the exact same reason.
Visibility isn't a crime… some folks just do it with more class and less carnage.
In bullet points because it's Friday, and I can't think:
1) I'm going to have to go ahead and suggest that comparing private blog networks to doctors selling experimental medicine and/or drug cartels isn't exactly fair. Unethical ≠ illegal.
2) This is capitalism. As consumers, your dollars are your votes of confidence. You don't have to "out" someone. Markets take care of that on their own; especially, when a business isn't providing a good or service of value. If you don't support a company's practices, just don't buy their products.
3) You're right about doing the best you can by holding yourself to the highest standard. When everything else is changing around you, that won't.
well written and on point. some big name internet marketers were touting BMR, so many small timers blindly followed without asking any questions. i'm sure lots of people big and small got hurt because of this.
"Put stones in their pockets, see if they float"
It's a shitty path.
Let us concentrate on client education, before throwing cack at each other.
Techniques will come and go. Stay educated.
Love these posts, so first thing – thanks for putting it together.
When a company like BMR goes under & rankings for potentially hundreds of sites go down, doesn't that in turn build businesses & create more jobs for those benefiting from the fall? New sites are now getting visibility & sales from their new position. That's good right?
In the end, if I don't earn great results, a client goes away. Jobs are lost. My job could be lost. To just "try harder & stop whining" is the easy way to say "shut up, I know I could be caught & it would hurt". When it comes down to my job or someone else, I'm picking my job. My results, even if it's stomping on someone else's non-Google friendly work, are my income. Karma (in the form of a really angry competitor) can bite back to bite for sure, but in the end they were ones risking it by violating guidelines by which they make a living. Yes. Google's guidelines by which they make a living.
Thanks again for stirring up the pot on this.
Pingback: Patience is a Virtue@seobook | seo博客大全
Pingback: back, bit, change, client, demand, fear, issue, job, link, month, number, PageRank, risk, run, self, SEO, sign, warning, work, year - Patience is a Virtue - SEO
Pingback: The ethics of SEO • Yoast
As promised in a tweet a few hours ago I'll try to write down my opinion in English in an understandable way.
First of all, I'm not active as SEO-er, I'm a forummoderator of a dutch entrepreneursforum.
That said, I notice two things in your blog post I'd like mention first:
You do not limit outing to a certain group of people, active in the same field, so I must assume you're also writing this for me as accidental reader.
Second you do not specify different forms of black-hat, which means you're saying that outing any form of Black-hat SEO is immoral for everybody.
Let me give you two cases of commentspam we had on our forum the last month which we outed and resulted in big media-attention (which we dit not aim for b.t.w.).
My question to you is to give me a valid reason not to out.
Case 1: 3 weeks ago somebody was commentspamming for Groupon on our forum. We tried to prove it was a Groupon-Employee acting anonymous by searching mailadres,ip-adres, avatars etc.
Finally we could prove it was an employee of this company, and also found many many other nicknames, and commentspam on other forums, including one specific post on a forum for patients with MS (Multiple Sclerosis) where he was saying (in brief) MS was diagnosed, he could barely walk, was very ill, but had the best help of a personal trainer in Amsterdam. As you understand the last 3 words of the line linked to a Groupon-deal for a personal trainer in Amsterdam…
Case 2: two weeks ago we found out a commentspammer on our forum was working for a SEO company. Search resulted in over 600 forumprofiles on 200 of the biggest dutch forums by just some employees of this company commentspamming for the biggest Telecomcompany, Carcompany, Coffeecompany and Workforceagency in the Netherlands in the last two years.
In both cases we decided to out it for several reasons:
-1- Case one was to rude to let it go, and case two was so big it was/is impossible to mail all forums involved asking them to remove the commentspam
-2- To create some awareness that although forums are moderated it's almost impossible to prevent people being misled by some Black-Hat-SEO-guys and girls
-3- To warn companies using these techniques that sooner or later a clever guy wil see the patterns and will out.
Commentspam has two advantages: It's a valuable link on mostly highrated forums, and anonymous posts influence the reader, building a brand, building a reputation.
The last part of this is 100% misleading, and to provide a reliable forum for our members, we will always out structural spam on our forum. Our members, and all visitors on our website are more important to us than the jobs of any company trying to win customers by black-hat-techniques.
If that means I'm a policeman on the internet? So be it.
(Our forum is non-commercial by the way)
Pingback: wp-coder.net » The ethics of SEO
Pingback: How to Guest Blog – NOT! « Will Scott
Pingback: Patience is a Virtue - SEO Blog
Pingback: The ethics of SEO | Construction Zone
Pingback: Patience is a Virtue « topservicewizard
Pingback: Ethics and SEO - Website Design Prices
I understand where you're coming from, and I do feel for the those hit by the loss of income.
However, as a CONSUMER (i.e. someone using google to find the products and services I need, i.e. your client), I do expect to be treated with more respect and I do expect legitimate websites to serve my needs.
This is business, and in business in general, you must serve the needs of the client, NOT the devious employee or devious business owner. Imagine if there was a restaurant where the chef consistently spat into the soup and encourage the rest of his/her to do the same. Or he/she served all-natural beef, but instead served hormone-addled beef from a factory at risk for asbestos poisoning. Would you also insist that the other employees, and other business owners who had become privy to this, not out this chef because it would shut the entire restaurant down?
I remember years ago, spammy websites were the only thing that could be found on first two or so pages of google. It came to the point where I would immediately jump to the 3rd page of google. I am happy that google has cleaned up its algorithm so that it is easier to find relevant and legitimate information to what I am looking for.
Pingback: The Phantom of Social Media: How Link Spam Continues to Haunt Google Rankings by @searchrook | jhWebWorks | Columbus Ohio Web Design, Development, SEO, Social Media
Thanks for sharing that article. But I think in 2-3 years google will be one big paid ad…
Best Regards


text:
I know a lot of you are nervous about Florida's junior senator and his playing footsie on immigration reform with the enemy, the so-called "failed president" who managed to use the issue to get re-elected, handily. So much for taking our country back.
Now comes Marco Rubio, the tea party darling and the GOP's great hope, this week with seven of his Senate colleagues promising bipartisan legislation that too many of you still believe is amnesty and the precursor of America's slide towards Third World status.
It didn't take long for the brickbats to fly. Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vittner called out Rubio on talk radio, describing him as "amazingly naive" and "nuts." Ann Coulter treated Rubio as if he were the second coming of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. She called him "a wolf in wolf's clothing" for pushing a plan that would create "more Democratic voters."
- Bio | E-mail | Recent columns
It's time to lay off Marco. All this sniping that the senator's somehow lost it. Someone with roots in the far-right fringe has to be a grownup on this issue. Give the man credit for trying.
This was the same politician who prompted conservative and tea party fans to put up a "Draft Rubio for President in 2012" web site a few months before the former Speaker of the Florida House had been sworn in to his Senate seat. He made last year's short list for Veep and his name pops up when talk turns to the top spot on the Republican ticket in 2016.
Now, some of you one-time acolytes think he's about to blow it big time.
Rubio's political career is adorned with adroit moves. As a former back bench Republican in the Florida House, Rubio broke from the "tough on big government" persona by showing a soft spot on children's issues and often soliciting new strategies to solve Florida's problems. He worked his way up the ranks, becoming the state's first Hispanic House Speaker.
Rubio's big break came in 2010 when former Gov. Charlie Crist did the apparently unforgiveable by meeting President Obama and welcoming him to the state with a man hug. Conservative Republicans crushed his dreams of winning election to the U.S. Senate by embracing a "principled" conservative.
Seen as his party's answer to President Obama – charismatic, eloquent newly elected minority politician-turned-U.S.senator with a good story and Oval Office potential – Rubio quickly found favor with the Washington establishment. Karl Rove came calling. So did the Club for Growth. A star was born.
Now some of you are sliming the guy for losing his principles.
Gimme a break!
The Republicans lost big in 2012, thanks largely to holding fast to a political ideology that much of America rejected. Don't believe the hype coming out of party officials that last November's shellacking could have been avoided with better messaging, a better ground game and a different candidate.
What some of you are beginning to understand is you can't win national and in many cases statewide elections by turning off so many blacks, Hispanics, women and youth. Others believe Republicans will be better served by eschewing moderation and holding fast to far-right principles.
Good luck with that.
What Rubio does with the immigration issue will determine if he maintains his status as Florida's junior senator or catapults towards a serious run at the White House. Imagine if he gets credit for resolving one of the nation's thornier problems while making gains for Republicans among a key voting bloc.
Right now, Rubio is making the rounds, winning over the Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs of the world while emphasizing his differences with the president. It's still good to have a foil in Washington, even if the effort is a bipartisan one.
At some point, some of you right-wing critics will have to cut Rubio some slack, or else you may get stuck with an even more derogatory label than 'fringe" – "losers."
Douglas C. Lyons can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com, or 954-356-4638. On Twitter@douginflorida.


text:
Schedule a
visit to HPU
Faculty & Staff
|Dr. Brian Augustine- firstname.lastname@example.com
B.A. Chemistry: SUNY Geneseo (NY), Ph.D. Chemistry: University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill
Professor of Chemistry and Chair
312 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-9405
|Dr. Christopher Behme– firstname.lastname@example.com
B.S. Chemistry: Saginaw Valley State University (MI), Ph.D. Chemistry: University of Wisconsin – Madison
Visiting Assistant Professor of Chemistry
363 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-9255
|Dr. Christopher Fowler- firstname.lastname@example.com
B.S. Chemistry: Kalamazoo College, Ph.D. Chemistry: University of Texas
Assistant Professor of Chemistry
341 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-9071
|Dr. Eric Lewis- firstname.lastname@example.com
B.A. Chemistry: N.C. State University, B.S. Biochemistry: N.C. State University, Ph.D. Molecular Medicine: Wake Forest University
Visiting Assistant Professor of Chemistry
339 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-9454
|Dr. Todd Knippenberg- email@example.com
B.S. Chemistry: Georgia Southern University, Ph.D. Chemistry: Clemson University
Assistant Professor of Chemistry
342 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-9531
|Dr. Elizabeth McCorquodale- firstname.lastname@example.com
B.S. Chemistry: High Point University, Ph.D. Chemistry: Wake Forest University
Associate Professor of Chemistry
340 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-4593
|Dr. Heather Miller- email@example.com
B.S. Molecular Biology and Biotechnology: Clarion University of Pennsylvania, Ph.D. Molecular Genetics: Duke University
Assistant Professor of Chemistry
338 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-9537
|Ms. Megan Perry- firstname.lastname@example.com
B.S. Chemstry: High Point University (NC)
Lab Manager / Safety Officer
352 Congdon Hall
(336) 841-1267


text:
Grills and Parts
Here in our Bargain Basement Grills and Parts section, you can find bargains on all kinds of clearance parts!
If you are looking at an item, get it while you can because it is gone for good once it's out of stock! We are continuously adding new product to this discounted section of our site, so make sure to keep checking back for added deals.
Ram 1/2/3500 1994-2002 Dodge Aluminum Grill
Regular Price: $138.99
Special Price: $79.99
Only 1 in stock


text:
Are my user id and password encrypted when logging into My Verizon and Verizon Online Webmail?
*(Please note this site is NOT maintained by Verizon and Verizon assumes no responsibility for its content or accuracy.)
Ask the Verizon Community questions like this:My connection is dropping out a lot.
Looking for Residential?
Looking for Wireless?


text:
Kindle Fire Product > Pacific-12 Alumni
This is your one-stop Pacific-12 Alumni Associations directory that provides all the information you will ever need to know about Pac-12 Alumni offices in the Pac-12 Conference.
At your fingertips, you have access to the contact information every Pac-12 Alumni would like to know about their Alumni Association. Not only can you instantly acquire contact information on every Pac-12 Alumni office, but in seconds you will be able to map the University Alumni Association address. The search feature is comprehensive and easy to use.
Application data includes:
Searching Features:
The goal of Pac-12 Alumni is to provide all Pac-12 alumni members with important information about Alumni Association in the Pacific-12 conference. We continue to update our database to ensure up-to-date and accurate alumni information.


text:
- Flat Rate Shipping. Any Size Order! -
- A Portion of Proceeds Benefit Browns Athletics -
HOME Cleveland Browns Gear Cleveland Browns Ladies Cleveland Browns Ladies Cups, Mugs & Shots (60 items) Product ID: 1274450
Main Content
- Made of plastic
- Holds approx. 16oz.
- Team color and logos
- Top rack dishwasher safe
- Do not microwave
- Snap on lid
- Handle with contoured grip
- Imported
- Officially licensed
Browns Customers also liked:
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
IKEA Spotting:
Best Uses of IKEA from Our Tours
Best of 2012
6. Ikea Bridge Prints in Seattle, Washington: James' Seattle Apartment With NYC Style
7. Ikea Shelves in Austin, Texas: Levi and Evette's Simple Approachable Style
8. An Ikea desk in McLean, Virginia: Linda's Fashionably Modest Condo
9. Ikea frames in Chicago, Illinois: Matt and Ben's Transitional Traditional Home
10. Several smaller Ikea rugs put together in Berlin, Germany: Rachel's Harmonious Home in Berlin
11. Ikea magnetic boards in Boston, Massachusetts: Jennifer's High-Low Mix
12. Ikea mirror in Boston, Massachusetts: Stephen's Warm Modern Loft
13. Ikea pendant lamps in Brighton, East Sussex, UK: Sue & Graeme's Eclectic Victorian Townhouse
14. Ikea Swing and Lamp in Denver, Colorado: The Wills' Anything But Ordinary Home
15. Ikea side tables in Los Angeles, California: Zeinab's Playful Beachwood Canyon Apartment
(Images: See linked posts for full image credits)
6 Comments
Ikea is getting cheaper in quality. They used to have metal laminated picture frames, of which I own six, and now they are laminated with plastic tape made to look like metal but of course looks awful.
I forgot to say that I wish they had more modern looking furniture geared for the American market. A lot of Ikea's take on modern actually doesn't look very modern at all.
I'll say it again: among the many many items I have procured from the trash that I later sell on Craigslist are Ikea tables, shelves, mirrors, chairs, etc.
These items that I upload to Craigslist do sell fast. What this tells me is that while yes they do go fast, they are also among the first items many people moving out leave behind, which tells me that they might not value or even like the items that much.
I kind of saw the appeal of Ikea in my youth, now, not so much.
are you sure the wardrobe in Robert's Rooftop View Over Berlin is from Ikea?
I have worked for IKEA for many, many years in Interior Design and the wardrobe in 'Robert's Rooftop View Over Berlin' is NOT from IKEA.
@RHD, LOL... Pretty shocking error, no? Apparently, someone mistook one of his "inherited Chinese antiques" for Ikea, If only you and your comrades could do something like that at Ikea prices...
Separately, I am very glad AT decided against citing the Ikea product names in this post.