<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[RSS Feed]]></title><description><![CDATA[RSS Feed]]></description><link>https://ecency.com</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 19:10:21 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://ecency.com/@usmanmughal/rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title><![CDATA[Google: 301s & 302s, What is Best For PageRank & Ranking Signals]]></title><description><![CDATA[At State of Search in Dallas last week, I asked Gary Illyes about the issue about 301 versus 302s when it comes to passing PageRank. While Google has said previously that both pass PageRank, there are]]></description><link>https://ecency.com/@usmanmughal/google-301s-and-302s-what-is-best-for-pagerank-and-ranking-signals</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://ecency.com/@usmanmughal/google-301s-and-302s-what-is-best-for-pagerank-and-ranking-signals</guid><category><![CDATA[seo]]></category><dc:creator><![CDATA[usmanmughal]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 22 Oct 2017 16:38:27 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>