You make many good and valid points nobody can dispute, but when do other people’s “free choices” (influenced greatly by talented marketing) about smoking cigarettes, etc. start affecting not just the persons using their free choice, but you and your future generations? Do we really care about anybody besides ourselves and our loved ones?

“As long as there are people looking for the fast and easy way to the top of the search engines, there will be spammers and published spam techniques. They aren’t good for you, but you can’t stop people from finding what they want.” = I totally agree and education is the key, but education is very time consuming for the people who want it. The SEO prospects that don’t have the time to follow all or most of Nacho’s great advice ( http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showpost.php?p=17495&postcount=1 ) will have to be left to the negative results of P.T. Barnum’s quote: “There’s a sucker born every day” as well as the ever present “buyer beware”. Even if the SEO prospect is not “misled”, the reputation of the SEM Industry can be negatively affected (see how, IMO, below).

I hope the SEM industry follows Danny Sullivan’s keynote advice: “Sullivan went on to cite a variety of examples where members of the SEM community have begun to take a stronger stand against the very worst practices perpetrated by members “not in good standing.” Sullivan believes in a broadly inclusive community, save for those who refuse to accept the basic rules of society—these, Sullivan seems to think, should be banished from the loop (clearly Danny’s been reading Jean-Jacques Rousseau).” See = http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3577081

Besides probably T.Power (IMO), how far, and doing what as a SEO, would be included in “those who refuse to accept the basic rules of society”? So, wouldn’t the “free choices” of SEO prospects (influenced by talented marketing) affect the overall reputation of the entire industry (now and in the future), because the SEO’s not doing ANY KIND OF SPAM (including the kinds that can be gotten away with = http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showpost.php?p=30957&postcount=28 ) are forced to be “competitive”, if they want to provide the level of ROI type results that many SEO buyers want?

“The others will be back to learn when they realize their “super secret tricks” really don’t work.” = This is certainly true, especially in the “long term”, but what happens to the SEM Industry in the mean time as far as its “reputation” is concerned. WOM is spreading faster these days amongst SEO buyers with industry association like the ANA, blogs, chat rooms, IM, etc..

Therfore, because I am for the HEALTHY growth of the SEO-SEM Industry (in the SHORT, as well as, long term), I hope Danny (gotta respect him!) or somebody figures out what are the specific determining factors when it is appropriate for Industry Associations (or some entity besides the government getting directly involved) to make informed judgements when it is appropriate for a search marketer to “be banished from the loop” (hopefully, that means some kind of serious and lasting ramifications).

Thanks for the opportunity for my “rant” and “my 2 cents”.