Nothing irks me more than clicking on an ad only to see some kind of site error. As an Internet marketer, I know that the advertiser just paid for my click or paid for the impression and they just lost an opportunity. It's bad enough when the site is down during an ongoing campaign, but when you have an email blitz the site better be up and ready for the bump in traffic.
So it's Friday and I'm trying to get better at putting blog entries in on a regular basis. It's the typical cobbler's shoes thing.
At any rate, I was checking out Matt Cutt's blog as I do a couple times a week and came across an entry clarifying Matt's stance on a few points. Now anyone who knows me knows that I may kid about the big Google monster and Matt especially, but the truth is I have a lot of respect for those guys. In a lot of ways they make my job easier (heck, they make my job possible). In his post, Matt references the Google Ad Preferences page where you can indicate your interests so ads are better targeted. I think this is both good and bad for completely different reasons.
So SEOmoz has an interesting article on "Indexation for SEO" and why you shouldn't rely on the site: tag in Google. While I agree with Rand Fishkin in his article it is interesting to read the comments that follow and see how differently people view the web analytics. There is even one comment that is clearly from someone who has not been doing this very long. I won't name names, but they point out a clear issue with any kind of web analytics tool and this inherent discrepancy is what I plan to cover in this entry.