<?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: Best Search Engine&#8230;Ever</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vanseodesign.com/search-engines/best-search-engineever/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/search-engines/best-search-engineever/</link>
	<description>Helping you build search engine friendly websites</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:07:45 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Bradley</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/search-engines/best-search-engineever/comment-page-1/#comment-1284</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Oct 2007 02:28:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/best-search-engineever/#comment-1284</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m glad you find it funny Kristine. The credit goes to James for finding it. I saw his post on Webmaster Talk about Google not showing Google first and then decided to check the other engines and capture the screen shots.

I&#039;d guess no one ever links to Google with the anchor text &#039;search engine&#039; as the reason. People just link to them as Google and so based on their own algorithm they&#039;re not as relevant for the term.

It was a nice find James. I want to say someone did this or a similar search once before, but I couldn&#039;t remember if they had. It is a bit of irony that two of the four don&#039;t list themselves on the first page and the other two list themselves first. It was also interesting that Dogpile was the only site listed in the top 10 on all four search engines.

And thanks for giving me an easy idea for a post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m glad you find it funny Kristine. The credit goes to James for finding it. I saw his post on Webmaster Talk about Google not showing Google first and then decided to check the other engines and capture the screen shots.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d guess no one ever links to Google with the anchor text &#8217;search engine&#8217; as the reason. People just link to them as Google and so based on their own algorithm they&#8217;re not as relevant for the term.</p>
<p>It was a nice find James. I want to say someone did this or a similar search once before, but I couldn&#8217;t remember if they had. It is a bit of irony that two of the four don&#8217;t list themselves on the first page and the other two list themselves first. It was also interesting that Dogpile was the only site listed in the top 10 on all four search engines.</p>
<p>And thanks for giving me an easy idea for a post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Lewitzke</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/search-engines/best-search-engineever/comment-page-1/#comment-1285</link>
		<dc:creator>James Lewitzke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:34:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/best-search-engineever/#comment-1285</guid>
		<description>Yeah, even though I originally did the search query just for fun, I didn’t think MSN would also say search.com, must have something to do with their search algorithm. I also thought it was ironic that the largest, most popular search engine wouldn’t even rank themselves in the top 10.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, even though I originally did the search query just for fun, I didn’t think MSN would also say search.com, must have something to do with their search algorithm. I also thought it was ironic that the largest, most popular search engine wouldn’t even rank themselves in the top 10.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kristine Shreve</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/search-engines/best-search-engineever/comment-page-1/#comment-1283</link>
		<dc:creator>Kristine Shreve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/best-search-engineever/#comment-1283</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s too funny.  It&#039;s actually even funnier because I never thought of doing that.

So if Google doesn&#039;t list themselves as the best search engine, does that mean they&#039;re the only one that isn&#039;t playing around with the results.  Or is it all just some Machiavellian plot to make it seem that way?

Now I&#039;m getting paranoid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s too funny.  It&#8217;s actually even funnier because I never thought of doing that.</p>
<p>So if Google doesn&#8217;t list themselves as the best search engine, does that mean they&#8217;re the only one that isn&#8217;t playing around with the results.  Or is it all just some Machiavellian plot to make it seem that way?</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m getting paranoid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
