 by getting lots of high-quality links back to your website and content.
So, for the sake of this blog’s topic of maximizing and understanding SEO, we will stick to diving in on the main pillars of how search engines classify content.
1. Discovery Stage
Search engines utilize bots to crawl across the web and quickly decipher the content located on each specific web page.
2. Relevance Stage
At the relevance stage, the bots essentially decide how relevant your content is to the user’s search inquiry. They do this through a process known as “indexing”.
This means they are taking the keywords and titles and comparing it based on the what the user initially searched.
3. Authority Stage
This stage primarily henges on your site’s authority in the given space the user is searching within.
This is determined by ranking backlinks used from other authorities linking back to a relevant topic on your site or a relevant and informative blog that you have written about.
Discovery, Relevance, and Authority Depend One Another
It is important to note that the 3 stages bots use for SEO ranking are not mutually exclusive.
They are all highly dependent on one another.
Relevant Content
For example, if your content isn’t relevant, then it has little change of ranking, no matter how authoritative it is.
But You Need Authority
Yet, if you lack authority, then you have little chance of ranking, even if the content is extremely relevant.
SEO Magic
The magic sauce is finding the balance between the two!.On *most* servers *most* of the time it is helpful, some more than others. The problem is that the other times can get absolutely **godawful** because there's basically fuck-all the people in it can do about it. Mentors can kick Sprouts/Returners from NN for 30 minutes, other Mentors for 3 hours, and that is literally all they can do. Past that the GMs need to step in, which A) requires you to fill out a support desk ticket, and B) they might respond by the next day, assuming you consider the standard "we are investigating but cannot share the outcome" copy-paste to be a response. If you're hoping for a ban you'd better have a year's worth of incidents collated together and have a GM willing to listen to you explain for the umpteenth time what some troll has been doing for the last year, rather than just evaluating each instance in a vacuum (which they may do after the explanation anyway). There's apparently an insanely high bar you're required to meet before they'll even consider a ban or suspension.

When it comes down to it Squenix basically said "the users should moderate the channel" only they didn't give the users any tools *or* regulations to use for moderating the channel. No one should be surprised that it can be turned into a dumpster fire with minimal effort.Just as offshore wind installation starts to accelerate, there is a worry that this potential bottleneck could drive up the costs of offshore wind operations and maintenance (O&M).
ROV services company SeaView Systems describes the vehicles as "unoccupied, highly manoeuvrable, underwater robots operated by a person on the surface". And, according to the International Marine Contractors Association (IMCA), an international body representing offshore, marine and underwater engineering companies, ROV operations for marine tasks are expanding dramatically. In the June 2014 issue of its in-house Making Waves magazine, IMCA pointed to estimates that at least 2,000 additional pilot technicians will be required by 2017-2019 to keep up with demand.
However, the outlook may not be alarming as some have feared. "Mechanisms are being put in place, and training providers and contractors are working hard to train new pilot technicians," says an IMCA spokesperson. "IMCA's ROV committee has also worked hard to try to facilitate that ongoing work."
Qualified
"We currently have all the ROV staff required in-house, but we are always looking for more suitably qualified personnel," says Graham Evans, business development coordinator of UK company Red7Marine Offshore, which provides subsea engineering, diving, diving support vessels, ROVs and seabed excavation equipment and services to the offshore oil, gas and renewables markets. "There is a problem with manpower across the oil, gas and marine sectors," he agrees. "There are more projects than there is manpower to support them," says Evans.
But what about the availability of ROVs, and just how vital are they to the offshore wind O&M sector? There are around 1,100 work-class ROVs, owned by 25 companies around the world, of which more than 500 are generally in use in the offshore oil and gas sector at any one time, according to the 2013 annual market survey on work-class ROV operations, which is carried out by energy business advisers Douglas-Westwood.
This indicates that there is spare capacity for use in the offshore wind sector.
ROV availability
"The key question is whether the ROVs can be made available in the right place at the right time," says John Westwood, group chairman of Douglas-Westwood. "After all, both the oil and gas sector and the offshore wind industry focus on fair weather periods for getting construction and O&M work done," he says.
In the oil and gas sectors there are around 300 floating drilling rigs, which are all equipped with one or more ROVs for use as a tool system and for observation. They provide what Westwood describes as a "very powerful insurance policy for getting things right in the drilling process". But with around 7,500 offshore wind turbines due to be installed over the next ten years, ROV use in the sector can be expected to grow, he adds.
The three biggest global ROV operators are: Texas-headquartered Oceaneering, which in 2013 owned around 316 ROVs used almost entirely for oil and gas drilling support; UK-based Subsea7, which has about 175 ROVs, mainly for use in oil and gas offshore construction; and Dutch firm Fugro, which has 158 ROVs, mainly specialising in surveying and inspection, especially for cable routes and marine geotechnical surveys, the Douglas-Westwood research revealed.
For the offshore wind O&M sector, observation-class ROVs are widely used for activities that include visual inspection of structures, scour monitoring, cable touchdown-point monitoring and measuring cathodic potential, says IMCA. Indeed, any work involving linear structures such as cables and cable routes moving away from a vessel, and where observation is required, would be an indicator for use of an ROV, says Westwood.
Work-class ROVs are used for activities such as debris clearance, mattress installation and retrofitting anodes. Many of the cable burial jetting tools are actually ROVs, says IMCA.
Health and safety
Evans of Red7Marine agrees that ROVs tend to be used to carry out site surveys and debris and unexploded ordnance clearance, as well as to provide support during foundation installation and other jobs involved in the installation of offshore wind turbines. He also stresses the health and safety benefits of using ROVs. They would be deployed in the first instance when it is believed that it would not be safe to send down divers because of potentially unsafe debris or other possible health and safety risks, he notes.
ROVs are not always right for the job, however. Red7Marine is currently working on the London Array project, which, like many offshore wind farms, is built on sandbanks. Being in shallow waters, London Array has involved diver support vessels as well as rigid inflatable boats (RIB) and Argocat amphibian vehicles for support, but has not required ROVs.
However, says Evans: "Our DP2 diver support vessels, Red7Reel and Red7Tonjer, both have ROV capabilities on board. These may be used for an initial inspection before divers are deployed," he says.
Bob Allwood, CEO of the Society for Underwater Technology, explains some of the drawbacks of ROV deployment. Offshore wind-turbine maintenance often involves visual inspection, for instance of possible scour on the seabed where sediment may be washed away by water currents. The inspection can be done by small "eyeball" ROVs. But in shallow depths, in the so-called splash zone where the water swirls and visibility is poor, the work is difficult for a diver, but even harder for an ROV. Therefore this work is usually carried out by divers, says Allwood.
A scour problem can be rectified by laying sand bags, another job more easily done by divers than by ROVs, he notes. A work-type ROV equipped with a seven-degree freedom of movement manipulating arm for carrying out the work, and a three-degree arm for grab and stabilising the ROV itself, could in theory be used. However, the sophistication of movement required and the conditions underwater mean the job of unloading sand bags from a box lowered from a vessel and placing them correctly around the foundation pile is carried out more easily and quickly by divers, says Allwood.
"Typically, a diving solution will be quicker to install each mattress," says IMCA in agreement. "However, if there are only a few mattresses to install, then the ROV solution may be lower cost. There may also be higher risks in having divers exposed to some of these operations. For example, a diver died in a German project last year installing concrete mattresses."
Deeper waters
Yet a large work-class type ROV, the size of a small room and weighing up to