Are we ready for search marketing standards?

[Kevin Newcomb]

The idea of setting industry standards for SEO and SEM is often greeted with lots of dissenting voices. In a way, it feels like you're telling smart marketers they must do search marketing within a box of specific guidelines.

But there may be a place for standards, according to Chris Boggs. In his latest Crossfire column, "Standards for SEO and SEM: The Time is Now (http://searchenginewatch.com/3628590)," Chris outlines a proposal to set standards that don't so much tell marketers what to do as make it clear whether what they choose to do has a certain level of risk built into it.

He suggests creating a glossary of tactics, and rating them according to the commonly agreed-upon risk level associated with their use.

Would those kinds of standards be useful for the industry? See any drawbacks to that plan?

[Kevin Heisler]

Standards? For SEOs?

Boggs, Aussiewebmaster's going to put you on the "3:10 To Yuma." (Yeah, Frank in the Russell Crowe part -that works.)

[jimbeetle]

Standards are nice, defining risk is a nice thought. We can do that today, but will it hold for tomorrow? The risk line is always being moved.

[AussieWebmaster]

Standards? For SEOs?

Boggs, Aussiewebmaster's going to put you on the "3:10 To Yuma." (Yeah, Frank in the Russell Crowe part -that works.)

Russell Crowe was the one put on the train... I don't mind being the bad guy

[Kevin Heisler]

Right. Russell Crowe was put on the train but he was a hero, too. He just followed his own moral code. Besides - he's the one who got away.

[AussieWebmaster]

Okay looking at it that way I guess it fits

[Kevin Newcomb]

I like the idea of setting standards for the purpose of defining the playing field. It won't stop people from purposefully straying outside the lines, but it would be useful for those who want to stay within the lines to know where they are.

So maybe I'm talking about defining best practices? Setting the ground rules?