<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The DomainFace Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.domainface.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.domainface.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:02:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Recent Speed Issues, And How We&#8217;re Solving Them by Richard</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2012/02/21/recent-speed-issues-and-how-were-solving-them/#comment-356</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:02:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=131#comment-356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m in the same line of work, so I can really appreciate how difficult these things can be. I&#039;m also really enthusiastic about the new interface (works very well) and forthcoming changes. All-in-all I&#039;m really bullish on what you guys are doing. I&#039;m just a bit surprised at how the recent episode was handled. That said I know you guys know, so not really worth any more words :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m in the same line of work, so I can really appreciate how difficult these things can be. I&#8217;m also really enthusiastic about the new interface (works very well) and forthcoming changes. All-in-all I&#8217;m really bullish on what you guys are doing. I&#8217;m just a bit surprised at how the recent episode was handled. That said I know you guys know, so not really worth any more words <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Recent Speed Issues, And How We&#8217;re Solving Them by Nathan Ridley</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2012/02/21/recent-speed-issues-and-how-were-solving-them/#comment-355</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nathan Ridley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=131#comment-355</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, thanks for the proxies link. We do in fact already use proxies, and a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of them!

I&#039;m sorry there was a lot of down time. Essentially we needed to get the old system replaced as quickly as possible because the data being offered had a massive number of out-of-date results due to back end lag resulting from the speed issues Kenny mentioned. As soon as we could, we deployed a new version which appeared to be working after numerous tests, but after being deployed, a whole lot of new problems started showing up and given that the new system was using new technology, we really had to learn by doing. It sucks that the system was down as much as it was, but please understand we continued working on it pretty much to the exclusion of all else. We should have communicated about all of this earlier, admittedly. Scrambling to get the system fixed was top priority though and writing a blog post about what was going on really just got delayed a lot longer than it should have. Despite all of the issues, we&#039;re still working really hard to get it to where we wanted it from the start and you will only see it become faster, more stable and more capable over time.

Nathan]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, thanks for the proxies link. We do in fact already use proxies, and a <em>lot</em> of them!</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry there was a lot of down time. Essentially we needed to get the old system replaced as quickly as possible because the data being offered had a massive number of out-of-date results due to back end lag resulting from the speed issues Kenny mentioned. As soon as we could, we deployed a new version which appeared to be working after numerous tests, but after being deployed, a whole lot of new problems started showing up and given that the new system was using new technology, we really had to learn by doing. It sucks that the system was down as much as it was, but please understand we continued working on it pretty much to the exclusion of all else. We should have communicated about all of this earlier, admittedly. Scrambling to get the system fixed was top priority though and writing a blog post about what was going on really just got delayed a lot longer than it should have. Despite all of the issues, we&#8217;re still working really hard to get it to where we wanted it from the start and you will only see it become faster, more stable and more capable over time.</p>
<p>Nathan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Recent Speed Issues, And How We&#8217;re Solving Them by Richard</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2012/02/21/recent-speed-issues-and-how-were-solving-them/#comment-354</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:13:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=131#comment-354</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just a thought on getting around the Google lookups.

trustedproxies.com offers some very interesting services that are focused on allowing massive parallel Google requests for things like ranking etc. If you haven&#039;t looked into this it might be well worth while checking out what they offer.

Is there any reason why you&#039;ve posted about speed issues, yet not a word about the fact that the service was unavailable for weeks if not months over the new year? Odd approach to take, and probably missing an opportunity to build some goodwill. Honestly can&#039;t fathom the lack of communication over the blackout period, and then a post about speed issues now?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a thought on getting around the Google lookups.</p>
<p>trustedproxies.com offers some very interesting services that are focused on allowing massive parallel Google requests for things like ranking etc. If you haven&#8217;t looked into this it might be well worth while checking out what they offer.</p>
<p>Is there any reason why you&#8217;ve posted about speed issues, yet not a word about the fact that the service was unavailable for weeks if not months over the new year? Odd approach to take, and probably missing an opportunity to build some goodwill. Honestly can&#8217;t fathom the lack of communication over the blackout period, and then a post about speed issues now?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by Paul</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-347</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:49:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-347</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for a super article.
I have just started buying aged domains and was wondering what effect a dropped domain would have on the perceived  Google age issue and your theory definitely stands up in my book.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for a super article.<br />
I have just started buying aged domains and was wondering what effect a dropped domain would have on the perceived  Google age issue and your theory definitely stands up in my book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by Harold PErez</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-346</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harold PErez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-346</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article and something I’ve been wondering about before – especially since seeing caught domains with updated creation dates in their whois records.

Well explained!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article and something I’ve been wondering about before – especially since seeing caught domains with updated creation dates in their whois records.</p>
<p>Well explained!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by Brett</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-338</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brett]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 02:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-338</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Having purchased 100s of domains with PR, for the PR side I&#039;d say no.  All had their ownership changed, and while we lost some of the PR, and majority remained.  If they would lose PR just based on ownership changing I&#039;d assume all would have lost PR (as all changed ownership).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having purchased 100s of domains with PR, for the PR side I&#8217;d say no.  All had their ownership changed, and while we lost some of the PR, and majority remained.  If they would lose PR just based on ownership changing I&#8217;d assume all would have lost PR (as all changed ownership).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by Justin @ Flipfilter</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-312</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Justin @ Flipfilter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 08:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-312</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great explanation Nathan.

Certainly one for a retweet!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great explanation Nathan.</p>
<p>Certainly one for a retweet!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by Jeanne Michael</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-311</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeanne Michael]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:27:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-311</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for sharing this info. I was surprised to learn that it may be possible to refresh the PR and the info on updating the backlinks was very good to learn.

What about changing hosting services? Will that affect PR? If the domain age is retained through transfer.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for sharing this info. I was surprised to learn that it may be possible to refresh the PR and the info on updating the backlinks was very good to learn.</p>
<p>What about changing hosting services? Will that affect PR? If the domain age is retained through transfer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by James</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-309</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2011 22:30:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-309</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article and something I&#039;ve been wondering about before - especially since seeing caught domains with updated creation dates in their whois records.

Your logic seems sound and thats the best we can do is apply logic and experience when we can never fully know what goes on behind closed doors at Google.  The age of the backlink profile makes a lot of sense.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article and something I&#8217;ve been wondering about before &#8211; especially since seeing caught domains with updated creation dates in their whois records.</p>
<p>Your logic seems sound and thats the best we can do is apply logic and experience when we can never fully know what goes on behind closed doors at Google.  The age of the backlink profile makes a lot of sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Does a domain really &#8220;lose its age&#8221; after it deletes? by Piscinas</title>
		<link>http://blog.domainface.com/2011/05/30/does-a-domain-really-lose-its-age-after-it-deletes/#comment-308</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Piscinas]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2011 12:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domainface.com/?p=123#comment-308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent article Nathan. Your logic makes perfect sense to me, most people don&#039;t take into account the complexity of google and come to too simple conclusions too soon, still it&#039;s understandable i remember when I first started doing SEO some years ago, when I look back i really was naive haha.

In my experience page rank makes hardly any difference to actual rankings, we had a site go from PR3 to PR0 over night and staid there, it never made any difference to it&#039;s rankings nor traffic :) From what i&#039;ve seen the diversity of the links (from lots of different sites) and link text have far more to say in the ranking of the site plus of cause having the kw in the domain name itself. I guess the age goes hand in hand with that last point, but I haven&#039;t really experimented much here.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent article Nathan. Your logic makes perfect sense to me, most people don&#8217;t take into account the complexity of google and come to too simple conclusions too soon, still it&#8217;s understandable i remember when I first started doing SEO some years ago, when I look back i really was naive haha.</p>
<p>In my experience page rank makes hardly any difference to actual rankings, we had a site go from PR3 to PR0 over night and staid there, it never made any difference to it&#8217;s rankings nor traffic <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  From what i&#8217;ve seen the diversity of the links (from lots of different sites) and link text have far more to say in the ranking of the site plus of cause having the kw in the domain name itself. I guess the age goes hand in hand with that last point, but I haven&#8217;t really experimented much here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

