| 7:22 am on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Not sure what you are referring to, but I'm seeing Ink. honoring the meta description tag, as they always have.
motorola v8088 information available at WorldPhones.com
find motorola v8088 and on-line information for motorola v8088 here!
This was a recent submission over the past 14 days, and the description is directly from the meta descrip.
This was in MSN, Canada.com shows the same exact description. URL was indexed 8/14/2000....
Suggest you check your HTML. If correct, only explanation I can come up with, is just one of those things that happens on computers from time to time, "Data Corruption".....
| 8:08 am on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
I have recently submitted sites showing using description tags and others not. Nothing wrong with the tags. And how about the sites showing up for 1 Jan 1970?
| 8:32 am on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Got some pages on a couple of domains that are showing the description pulled from both the title tag and the page text. Looks a bit spammy as you can imagine.;)
These pages have been in the dB for a while and have not been resubmitted, Ink has spidered and updated these pages unprompted.
| 8:46 am on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
NFFC - I have a couple like that too.
| 12:40 pm on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Looks spammy - yes. Especially since I just found a cloaking code error where meta keywords and meta description were reversed.
You know what? The rankings went up...
| 1:10 pm on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
>showing the description pulled from both the title tag and the page text
This sounds very similar the answer I got when I asked how Google was coming up with their descriptions. And, I've recently been reading (theories) that the SE's are de-emphasizing metas because they are prone to spam. I wonder if we are seeing the first shift in the INK algo on meta descriptions?
| 3:25 pm on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Had a few I had found that were submitted back in May. Just attributed them to program glitch on Ink's end.... As rampant as information flies around the forums now, here and at SEF, I just like to see things really verified before, everyone accepts the topic as a permanent change... :)
| 6:18 pm on Aug 26, 2000 (gmt 0)|
I went from 8 to 3 for primary KW combo. The first ten results are coming from Looksmart -- I can tell from the descriptions which are no longer the meta tag. After the first 10, no metas being read: text from the site.
An old page, designed for INK as of about 6-8 months ago is suddenly at 34.
Another dot-com, however, is nowhere for the combo.
| 10:38 am on Aug 27, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Here's another one for the mix;
Long established domain, been kicking about years, I've only recently taken over promotion.
I submitted the index page on 20/7 and was visited by;
Slurp.so/1.0 21st 22nd 23rd
Net BSD 22nd
The page was indexed on the 23rd.
On a URL search at Freeserve the page in question has *two* listings, both exactly the same path etc. The difference is that the page listed at position 1 has a relevance of 99% and the description is a combination of the title and the first part of the page text. The dupe page has a relevancy of 61% and the description is pulled from the tag.
I think the first page has been spidered by Ink with no connection to my submittal, the second page is a direct result of my submission.
Anyone else seeing independently spidered pages "boosted"?
| 9:53 pm on Aug 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Not sure if this has already been noted, I have yet to see anyone mention this?? Inktomi is now using the meta title and the description is pulled from Looksmart. This appears to be the case for pages that rank well as opposed to pages that are buried. My only question is why we never saw a press release concerning this???...Brett, you usually make mention of press releases etc... Have you come across anything official???
For those of you who need an example of inktomi using the meta title and the looksmart description.....here it is....the site in question is the first site listed under matching websites....