|ranks and how to achieve them...|
found a really well placed site, how'd they do it?
| 3:55 pm on Oct 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
I've tried what tools I have at my disposal to figure this one out, but it has eluded me. I know I ask an aweful lot of the community here, but I do sincerely appreciate the help.
...has something I can't figure out for the #1 spot. And after reading the stuff on the www9 conference papers, I am really stumped. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance.
| 4:09 pm on Oct 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Lost me Hans. Other than the fact it is Lucent (huge). Also, could be remanufactuered is a known synonym for "reuse" which is prominent on the page.
(if that is still the same top ranked site - cloaked).
| 4:11 pm on Oct 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
What your seeing is not what they got ranked with......their's some kind of redirect. Look at the listed url and then click on the link and look at what url your actually taken too....
| 4:13 pm on Oct 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Url changes, so I can't check out the page when you click...I though AV didn't appreciate/like or accept people cloaking, and the same company has gotten the client into two spots, both showing up at the same target location.
So I guess what I'm after here, is how "relevant" is this cloaking, any way I could find out? I am interested in search relevance, and am fascinated by things like this.
| 8:20 pm on Oct 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
The SE's have said that it's spam that they don't like, not cloaking. If you look at the title/description listed, you can see that they cloaked relevant content.
| 10:17 pm on Oct 30, 2000 (gmt 0)|
Thanks, I agree with that. Have been reading some of the other posts today, lots of great new stuff.
Actually, I forgot, when I posted earlier, how to get at the page that I wanted to see. Pretty interesting what they did, although time consuming to create.
Appreciate the assistance though, and I loved reading the AV research papers...gives real insight into things for a novice like myself. Who knows, maybe I'll want to design my own engine ;)