<?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: Why does Live search continue to rank dead websites?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.intelligentpositioning.com/blog/2009/05/why-does-live-search-continue-to-rank-dead-website/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.intelligentpositioning.com/blog/2009/05/why-does-live-search-continue-to-rank-dead-website/</link>
	<description>SEO web development social media consulting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:58:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anita Duchene</title>
		<link>http://www.intelligentpositioning.com/blog/2009/05/why-does-live-search-continue-to-rank-dead-website/#comment-2224</link>
		<dc:creator>Anita Duchene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 15:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ip-seo.com/latest/?p=688#comment-2224</guid>
		<description>Poggers, since when have search engines been concerned with the legality of the sites they link to?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Poggers, since when have search engines been concerned with the legality of the sites they link to?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://www.intelligentpositioning.com/blog/2009/05/why-does-live-search-continue-to-rank-dead-website/#comment-2199</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 20:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ip-seo.com/latest/?p=688#comment-2199</guid>
		<description>Yeah interesting piece. Do Live&#039;s Bots simply have less inteligence than Google&#039;s? Or does the Algorithm still pick up old sites? 
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah interesting piece. Do Live&#8217;s Bots simply have less inteligence than Google&#8217;s? Or does the Algorithm still pick up old sites?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PoGGers</title>
		<link>http://www.intelligentpositioning.com/blog/2009/05/why-does-live-search-continue-to-rank-dead-website/#comment-2104</link>
		<dc:creator>PoGGers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 16:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ip-seo.com/latest/?p=688#comment-2104</guid>
		<description>I have to admit, I didn&#039;t know that this was actually the case with Live. But to be fair, I haven&#039;t used it since that one time about 10 years ago. Though evidently, this is the case. I have to say this is very shocking to me, now that its been brought to light. This also makes me wonder as to what other types of illegal content Live could be indexing to its public. Its definitely a scary thought and needs to be rectified - Promptly! This only reflects Google&#039;s awesomeness over the internet. The market shares say it all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to admit, I didn&#8217;t know that this was actually the case with Live. But to be fair, I haven&#8217;t used it since that one time about 10 years ago. Though evidently, this is the case. I have to say this is very shocking to me, now that its been brought to light. This also makes me wonder as to what other types of illegal content Live could be indexing to its public. Its definitely a scary thought and needs to be rectified &#8211; Promptly! This only reflects Google&#8217;s awesomeness over the internet. The market shares say it all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

