homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 515 message thread spans 18 pages: < < 515 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 18 > >     
They're at it again with the -sj server
different serps and backlinks

 1:13 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Looks like they are testing the www-sj.google.com server again. I see 384k backlinks for yahoo and the serps are different.



 3:32 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Maybe do some searchs and have a look at the sites that appear and see what they are like.

It could be a bunch of results from freshbot of how good some new pages are and so if you look closely enough you maybe able to use it to you're advantage by seeing how the new pages are doing?!?


 3:34 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

there are too many inconsistencies in sj for it to be an update. It also isnt picking up some internal links let alone external links. This would make google a laughing stock if it was the real deal. Ok, ive got from #1 to #40, but i'm allowed an opinion right?


 3:35 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Ya, besides, if it was an update then we'd see some of the other datacenters starting to dance by now.



 3:36 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Just been looking at it again and studying results. It definitely does not include any deep crawl results from the last deep crawl as far as I can tell.

My money is on SJ being an experiment/problem.



 3:38 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Actually, I take it all back - this is just GoogleGuy playing a very sick joke.




 3:38 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)



 3:40 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

I can just see GoogleGuy leaning over to one of his co-workers, and exclaiming (with a half-sneer on his face) "Betcha I can make 1,000 guys at WebmasterWorld sh*t the bed with one flip of the switch--Watch this..."



 3:42 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

I too can't believe that sj shows the new index in any way because the results are very bad. Very spammy , many results with Session Ids and things like that.
Absolutely bad!


 3:48 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

>My money is on SJ being an experiment/problem.

Maybe the google tech team just uses sj to record a nice set of searches to see what areas are worth a closer look? It's easy for them to spread a rumor here and there so every seo aware webmaster starts to check his / her positions at sj - then they let spambot look over these results ... >:)

Another speculation: the sj algo gives more weight on spammy tactics to bring the fishy sites on top. Then spambot weeds out the garbage from the surface without digging around in deep results ...

I'd also vote for sj being a experiment. Makes my day easier.


 3:53 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

We're down on page 4 in SJ for our major keyword search but all of the sites above us are clean and not using spamming techniques - they're all well-behaved competitors.



 3:53 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Critter -

make that 1001.


 3:54 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

How many members are there incidentally?


 3:54 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

SJ looks good to me - shows more of my pages than before and better SERPS.

SJ lead the way at the last update, why do you all think that it is not doing the same this time?


 3:55 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

why do you all think that it is not doing the same this time?

Because it does not show any of the results of the last deep crawl from 10 days ago.



 3:57 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

well i would like to say that i see many spammy results in the sj server... i see many sites which are spamming ruling the SERP's....If google is considering to use this as the new update, then i would like to inform them that they have a bad algo this time since it shows many spammy guys up on the SErp's...but i highly doubt this is going to be the results of the coming forth update..after all google knows what they are doing so they prob figured out the cons and pros of their new algo in the sj server...


 3:59 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Also, the funny thing is that the admins or googleguy himself are not contributing anything to this thread...maybe they just want to watch us say what we have to say about the results on sj...


 4:01 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Won't be anything to do with the admins.... possibly googleguy though. Although that would be very underhand....




 4:11 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

If not for the link discrepancy, I would say it is an update. I have got new pages in there. My keywords are where there should be in the SERPs. In general, everything looks good. Infact, much better than it used to be.

But when I search for backlinks, I see only internal links. Anyone else seeing this?

Dont know what to make out of all this.


 4:19 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

It's a very weird-looking index whatever it is....

Some of our sites are in exactly the same positions in the SERPS that they were before, one has fallen by 10 pages (!) for no obvious reason - nothing spammy, no problems with it before, lots of new links that should've been picked up by now.
Another site that's been in the index for a couple of months has vanished from the first 30 or so pages from all it's keywords (was at no.1 - 2), but is still in the index buried very deep.
Two new sites picked up by Freshbot are included.

So from here it's some weird mix of old and new plus a couple of total disasters which are going to make me very popular with the sites' owners - I don't think! Ho hum.

I really hope this isn't the new index - I have to agree that from the results I've looked at, if this is the new index then spamming is the way forward :(

I thought people had said on this board before that -sj showed the old index...?


 4:19 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

I'm showing external backlinks on -sj..


 4:21 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

hmmm seems to me that those who are doing better in sj think its a good algo, and those that are doing worse think its a spammy one :)


 4:22 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Wow, I just hope this is <B><i>the</i></B> update. If it is, all of the hard work over the last few months will have paid off -- and much thanks will be owed to the folks here.


 4:23 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

add me to the i think it's a good update :) I have a new site in there with the entire site showing up. My other sites are up anywhere from 2-10 positions.

BTW - All clean sites, no spam.


 4:29 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

They are using an older RDF Dump.
At least 1 - 2 months older than the newest one.

One of my sites has a ODP link for 2 months now but it doesn't show the odp link on -sj.

[edited by: ikbenhet1 at 4:30 pm (utc) on May 2, 2003]


 4:29 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)



 4:31 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

>seems to me that those who are doing better in sj think its a good algo, and those that are doing worse think its a spammy one

Popular opinion that. Another: those who think it's a good algo, promise that they don't use fishy tactics.



 4:32 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Well some of it (the bits I've checked) are very spammy, but then some bits of the index are very spammy anyway and some bits aren't :)
What I'm noticing where the sites have dropped very badly is that they're behind a whole load of sites that seem to have very little relevance at all to the search I'm doing. Can't even see the keywords on some of them but haven't checked if they're hidden.
Certainly the sites at the very top are really stuffed to death with keyword lists and pretty much nothing else - almost non-sensical to a human, but I s'pose the bot must like it.
Yes, of course I'd be happy with it if all our sites had come out on top, but at least let me be confused and unhappy in public if a whole load of careful and non-spammy work has not only not paid off, but caused sites to sink without trace.


 4:33 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Another: those that don't think it's a good algo accuse innocent sites of using fishy tactics.



 4:36 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

expireds are back in full force..heaven help us if this is a real update


 4:48 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

>accuse innocent sites of using fishy tactics

I'd second that! I allways accuse these damn fisherman's sites above my site of using fishy tactics. Hmmm... i'll go to church on sunday, i promise! ;)


 4:49 pm on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Somehow I think that google is always experimenting and this is one of those. How else would they do algo tweaks etc.?

This 515 message thread spans 18 pages: < < 515 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 18 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved