Return to Answer

This is by design, otherwise legal creative commons scrapers demolish us in search rankings. Your concerns are unfounded, in fact, it's quite the opposite.. Matt Cutts himself signed off on this approach and endorsed it in an email to me.

See:

First tag in the title of the page is not that convenient

and

Scrapers enter the scene - was the choice of license right?

for details.

I would also argue that this encourages proper and correct tagging of questions. If the tag is objectionable in the title, then it's probably a bad tag practice -- as you pointed out!

This is by design, otherwise legal creative commons scrapers demolish us in search rankings. Your concerns are unfounded, in fact, it's quite the opposite.. Matt Cutts himself signed off on this approach and endorsed it in an email to me.

See:

First tag in the title of the page is not that convenient

and

Scrapers enter the scene - was the choice of license right?

for details.

I would also argue that this encourages proper and correct tagging of questions. If the tag is objectionable in the title, then it's probably a bad tag practice -- as you pointed out!

This is by design, otherwise legal creative commons scrapers demolish us in search rankings. Your concerns are unfounded, in fact, it's quite the opposite.. Matt Cutts himself signed off on this approach and endorsed it in an email to me.

See:

First tag in the title of the page is not that convenient

and

Scrapers enter the scene - was the choice of license right?

for details.

I would also argue that this encourages proper and correct tagging of questions. If the tag is objectionable in the title, then it's probably a bad tag practice -- as you pointed out!

This is by design, otherwise legal creative commons scrapers demolish us in search rankings. Your concerns are unfounded, in fact, it's quite the opposite.. Matt Cutts himself signed off on this approach and endorsed it in an email to me.

See:

First tag in the title of the page is not that convenient

and

Scrapers enter the scene - was the choice of license right?

for details.

I would also argue that this encourages proper and correct tagging of questions. If the tag is objectionable in the title, then it's probably a bad tag practice -- as you pointed out!

This is by design, otherwise legal creative commons scrapers demolish us in search rankings. Your concerns are unfounded, in fact, it's quite the opposite.. Matt Cutts himself signed off on this approach and endorsed it in an email to me.

See:

http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/71906/first-tag-in-the-title-of-the-page-is-not-that-convenient

and

http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/71982/scrapers-enter-the-scene-was-the-choice-of-license-right

for details.

I would also argue that this encourages proper and correct tagging of questions. If the tag is objectionable in the title, then it's probably a bad tag practice -- as you pointed out!

This is by design, otherwise legal creative commons scrapers demolish us in search rankings. Your concerns are unfounded, in fact, it's quite the opposite.. Matt Cutts himself signed off on this approach and endorsed it in an email to me.

See:

First tag in the title of the page is not that convenient

and

Scrapers enter the scene - was the choice of license right?

for details.

I would also argue that this encourages proper and correct tagging of questions. If the tag is objectionable in the title, then it's probably a bad tag practice -- as you pointed out!