Users Developers
Home / Forums / In-Portal CMS / New Features & Improvement Suggestions / SE Optimization / Topic Posts

In-Portal Forum

This is a place for users of In-Portal to ask questions, discuss various topics, and interact with other members of the In-Portal Community. Please report bugs through the Bugs Team (not the Forum). If you are interested in contributing or joining one of the many Teams for In-Portal, please check out the Contribute section of the website.

In-Portal Forum

SE Optimization (7)

Posted: 01/16/2003 9:33:00 AM

Reply Quoted  


I know this issue has been discussed before but I don’t think we ever got a clarification on what is going to be done with it.

Every webmaster’s dream is to get his/her website on top of search engines results and work day and night to achieve this.

I have transferred to in-link about 8 months ago. I was using a different script to manage my directory and it was php and pages are generated dynamically.

Search engines had no problem spidering every page, in fact all my pages we spidered by all major search engines.

Once I transferred to in-link, SE stop spidering my site until I removed the SID from the URL. Once I removed it all my pages were spidered the next month.

Now almost all Search engines spider dynamic pages but they DO NOT spider dynamic URL. The sid will change every time a visitor come to my site from different IP address.

When SE spider sites for example Google, they use different IP addresses and every time they come to my site the URL change, and that cause my not to be spidered.

I know you are coming up with a static page version, which I think is great. But I don’t think you are releasing it with the first in-portal release! Am I correct?.

Also for people who decide to use the dynamic version, I think this should be SE friendly too.

A lot of webmasters when they submit their site to other portals, they do it to increase link popularity. If a webmaster with Google IE tool bar installed arrive at a site using in-link and see it has a page rank of 0 then they will leave without submitting their site.

I am sure a lot of people will also consider how friendly in-link is to SE when they purchase your script.

I wanted to mention this to give you an insight of this problem and see how or what’s your plan to deal with this.

Thank you.

Posted: 01/20/2003 10:40:00 AM

Reply Quoted  

I would like to hear from the development team about this issue.

Posted: 01/21/2003 12:27:00 AM

Reply Quoted  

Greetings All!

I checked Google and a few other engines in regard to our web site and they appear to have only spidered the main index page.

When we started out with In-link it appeared that the spiders being used at that time were spidering deeper into the web site as it was tripping the "Report Deadlink" link.

Also I like to raise another issue.. Statistics.

Our Hosting service uses Webalizer Version 2.01 so we can track our stats.

However the report for the pages looks like this;

1 4396 15.20% 219 95.63% /dir/
2 13 0.04% 7 3.06% /dir/admin/login.php
3 2005 6.93% 2 0.87% /phpAds/adlog.php
4 308 1.07% 1 0.44% /phpAds/adimage.php

Urls is even worse. These stats are virtually worthless to me as it not showing the page the visitor went to. I am wondering how to resolve the issue.

Appreciate comments on both the SE issue and stats issue.

Posted: 02/02/2003 9:29:00 AM

Reply Quoted  

Same problem here. Since I started using InLink my site popularity on search engines decreased a lot.

Luckily I do have lot of loyal people that come back to my site tryin' to find out what's goin' on in it.

Is it so important to have Session IDs with non logged users?

Posted: 02/03/2003 9:06:00 PM

Reply Quoted  

Bumping this up again as I consider this an important issue.

Posted: 02/04/2003 5:42:00 AM

Reply Quoted  

Hi there, maybe someone of the support can give us the solution but I discovered a few things as I also posted in the forum a question about W3C validation.

I discovered that using an & in the pages instead of & to pass parameters to a linked script does validate xhtml 1.0 with the w3c validator at

That means that an <a> tag with:
"index.php?sid=891391409&amp;t=login" is parsed right but...
"index.php?sid=891391409&t=login" is not.

I don't know how Google or any other search engine do work, but maybe this way we can have our pages indexed again.

The worst thing is that is not that easy to change every & reference tweaking the scripts. There may be an official option to do it.

If someone of Intechnic will reply to this one I think I'll not need any reply to my other "w3c validation" posts.


Posted: 02/04/2003 5:44:00 AM

Reply Quoted  

gosh... forum changed my &amp; characters in the last message. I hope it will be clear that I mean to use the &amp;amp; character as solution to the validating problem and maybe as indexing one.


As usual,
MrDisaster Strikes again