<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: 3 Important Things Matt Cutts Has Already Said About Link Building This Year	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-matt-cutts-linkbuilding.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-matt-cutts-linkbuilding.html?utm_source=feed&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=feed</link>
	<description>Canada&#039;s Search and Social Media Authority</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2017 01:48:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Arun Kallarackal		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-matt-cutts-linkbuilding.html/comment-page-1#comment-712316</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arun Kallarackal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2014 09:26:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=44778#comment-712316</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Barrie,

Nice write up and an informative post. Matt&#039;s explanations and videos help bring clarity to the link building game :)

Talking about #1, evolving, keeping the user&#039;s needs in mind is the key! I think we bloggers should be like &#039;perpetual students&#039;, finding the latest and most needed innovations and implement them on our blogs.

And Matt&#039;s take on grammar in comment section is interesting. Agreed that the comment section is frequented by loads of people, many of whom may not be much careful about grammar and spelling. It&#039;s nice to hear that such comments won&#039;t harm ranking of a particular post or content.

Arun]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Barrie,</p>
<p>Nice write up and an informative post. Matt&#8217;s explanations and videos help bring clarity to the link building game 🙂</p>
<p>Talking about #1, evolving, keeping the user&#8217;s needs in mind is the key! I think we bloggers should be like &#8216;perpetual students&#8217;, finding the latest and most needed innovations and implement them on our blogs.</p>
<p>And Matt&#8217;s take on grammar in comment section is interesting. Agreed that the comment section is frequented by loads of people, many of whom may not be much careful about grammar and spelling. It&#8217;s nice to hear that such comments won&#8217;t harm ranking of a particular post or content.</p>
<p>Arun</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Thomas Ballantyne		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-matt-cutts-linkbuilding.html/comment-page-1#comment-708948</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thomas Ballantyne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=44778#comment-708948</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Good write up Barrie. 

RE:DWJL
As for the 3rd point, I think the grammar in the comment section is more about content in comment sections holding a little less value and even overall, grammar is probably a lower weighted factor. Approving spam comments vs approving porrly ritten coments (...see what I did there)  are two separate things. Most commenters don&#039;t review comments very well before submitting them. Typos happen, and I even find myself wishing I could go back a fix errors in my own comments. ...With the exception of the rare purposeful misspelling.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good write up Barrie. </p>
<p>RE:DWJL<br />
As for the 3rd point, I think the grammar in the comment section is more about content in comment sections holding a little less value and even overall, grammar is probably a lower weighted factor. Approving spam comments vs approving porrly ritten coments (&#8230;see what I did there)  are two separate things. Most commenters don&#8217;t review comments very well before submitting them. Typos happen, and I even find myself wishing I could go back a fix errors in my own comments. &#8230;With the exception of the rare purposeful misspelling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: DWJL		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-matt-cutts-linkbuilding.html/comment-page-1#comment-704964</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DWJL]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:39:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=44778#comment-704964</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The first two make sense.  The third does not. If a webmaster approves trashy comments, that&#039;s a pretty easy indicator that the site has quality issues.  A quality-minded webmaster does not approve poorly written comments.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first two make sense.  The third does not. If a webmaster approves trashy comments, that&#8217;s a pretty easy indicator that the site has quality issues.  A quality-minded webmaster does not approve poorly written comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
