homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.161.236.92
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 81 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 81 ( 1 [2] 3 > >     
PR0 After Blogging
madone




msg:122673
 2:14 am on Jan 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hello, i tried to post as message in different blogs my own websites.

After 2 month and after florida, Google penalize my sites, they had PR=4 or 5 and now they have PR=0 and you can't find them in SERPS.

Someone know how to re enter in the index in hurry? And with the normal Page rank?

Thanks.

 

rfgdxm1




msg:122703
 2:02 am on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

>I have no argument, the idea is unethical, but it could also be just a "crime" of ignorance, and either way, I wouldn't say something like that in real life, so I wouldn't say it online either, but that's just me I guess.

It would be trivial for a competitor to spam the competition's URL to lots of blogs. If Google is penalizing for this, this is truly bad and alarming.

madone




msg:122704
 2:33 am on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

It would be trivial for a competitor to spam the competition's URL to lots of blogs. If Google is penalizing for this, this is truly bad and alarming.

It think about it too.

if someone spam my sites to many blogs and after google penalize these sites what i can do?
How can i demostrate im not spamming but it's my competitor?

Why googleguy said, external factors don't penalize your site..? Uhmm

Ok the only thing google can do is to reindex the websites but it takes long time, if a company have business only with SEO if it lost their sites what will happen?

I mean if these sites can't be in adwords for strict adwords rules how a company can live?

?!?! gulp?!?!

steveb




msg:122705
 3:02 am on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

Google likes blog links a lot. A small shakeup in the serps in the past several hours and two types of crap seo tactics seem to be being rewarded: blog links (middling amount of reward) and anchor text links on garbage linksmanager pages (huge spike in value for these).

Google is doing so much better than pre-florida, but it still is vulnerable to the obvious bits of zero-content anchor text spam -- especially in combination. I'm looking at a site that just rocketed up the serps for a 20,000,000+ term. It has less than eighty backlinks, of which seventy or so are from blogs and message boards (the other ten are junk link exchanges). This gets the page a middling amount of PR. Then, the "content" of this site is one page consisting of nine links to family sites, plus a "partner links" link. This partner links section... well, I'm looking at page2016.asp right now. Thousands of pages of off topic, irrelevant, anchor text junk.

I'm glad the datacenters haven't come back because if this is what we have been waiting for it would be catastrophic.

Dear Google, florida was great. Now PLEASE add some topic relevance; please ignore all linksmanager pages; please consider blogs the same as message boards and ignore those links in terms of topicality.

I personally do understand that blog spamming is a tough one for Google to deal with, and that many blogs are legitimate, but this is one of the key/succesfull spammers tools of choice right now, and it is only getting worse.

plumsauce




msg:122706
 5:40 am on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)


Flicker, this is not aimed at you, but
your comments are an interesting jumping
off point.


... for someone who got caught doing something against the rules

that's just it, there are no *RULES*, only conventions,
superstitions, what have you.


but it IS like cheating at a card game, ...

well, no, because card games have *codified* rules.
try cheating in a real casino sometime.

an observation: organisations promulgate rules and
regulations for behaviour that *threatens* them or
offer them an advantage. ergo, it is fruitful, with
regard to google to examine their rules and guidelines,
with an eye to attempts to regulate by fiat, what they
cannot prevent with technology.

in other words, what guidelines are in place simply
because they cannot force compliance by technical means?

flicker




msg:122707
 6:20 pm on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

I wasn't talking about cheating in a casino, but at your neighborhood poker game. If your poker buddies catch you cheating they're probably going to throw you out of their game and never let you come back. That's their prerogative. Same with bloggers. If you spam their blogs they have to clean up after you, and it torques them off. If they report you to Google and Google penalizes you... well, you shouldn't have done something you know annoys people and violates blog and Google rules just so as to artificially inflate your Google rank. It's like tilting a pinball machine. If you do it, do it knowing you run the risk of penalty. *shrug* Doesn't seem like rocket science.

BigDave




msg:122708
 8:40 pm on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

madone,

You never did answer if they were blogger weblogs. If you were really penalized for this (which I still doubt), this is a very important question to answer.

And if they were Blogger weblogs, did you post the messages from the same IP address as your site?

plumsauce




msg:122709
 11:17 pm on Jan 17, 2004 (gmt 0)


Flicker,

Like I said, the comments were not aimed
at you, I just found them to be a convenient
starting point.

The point is everyone at the card table
knows the rules not some guidelines
that move like quicksand.

I think that this is an important distinction
when calling someone out for some supposed
violation.

steveb




msg:122710
 12:13 am on Jan 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Google's guidelines don't "move like quicksand". They are, and have been, solid for quite some time. The only thing that moves is what emphasis is put on various algorithmic elements. If you play by the rules, you have nothing to fear from the guidelines. But it is just way wrong to confuse that with "anchor text is devalued this month".

plumsauce




msg:122711
 10:09 am on Jan 18, 2004 (gmt 0)


If you play by the rules, you have nothing to fear from the guidelines.

Huh?

What rules?

There are guidelines and a lot of folklore, there
are no rules.

By this, I mean that there is a lot of gray fog
out there. Nothing as simple as the rules of
poker.

And to repeat an old nut, they can't even figure
out how to correctly apply some pretty basic rfc's.

Can any of the leading lights here truly say that
they never stray from the guidelines and never
do anything for their own advantage? Even WWM
does not link freely, but carefully hoards PR.

steveb




msg:122712
 11:38 am on Jan 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

[google.com...]

BigDave




msg:122713
 5:57 pm on Jan 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

plumsauce,

You said:
Can any of the leading lights here truly say that
they never stray from the guidelines and never
do anything for their own advantage?

Where do you people get this strange idea that google does not want you to "do anything for your own advantage". If they did not want you to be able to improve your site for better rankings, why do they specifically tell you how to do it?

If you read their guidelines page, it is basically a list of *things to do*.

The last section tells you what not to do, particularly
Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you. Another useful test is to ask, "Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't exist?"

This doesn't say that you should not try to improve your rankings, it says "don't try and trick us". Are you unable to tell the difference between things you do to actually improve your site and a "trick"?

Yeah, there is a grey area, but it really is very small.

Just because google does not catch you (currently) does not mean that it is in the grey area. Even if it is in the grey area, you should understand that you are the one taking a chance when you play in the fog.

I can honestly say that I only take small excursions into the grey area, and only in those cases where someone doing a manual check would understand the reason. For example, hiding a document from the SE using a JS link because it was coming up for a lot of searches that were serving no one's interest.

Have I done things to get better search engine rankings? Of course. And I almost always get complements from users for the changes improving their experience. Do I try and trick the SE? No.

Google wants the best sites to come up at the top, and if you happen to decide to make the best possible site in your category, and it ranks #1, they would be thrilled. That is why they tell you how to do it.

madone




msg:122714
 12:19 am on Jan 19, 2004 (gmt 0)


madone,
You never did answer if they were blogger weblogs. If you were really penalized for this (which I still doubt), this is a very important question to answer.

And if they were Blogger weblogs, did you post the messages from the same IP address as your site?

Yes there are blacklists, in there you can find a lot of sites, if someone write a site in blogs it block his/her message.

I think a owner of a blog just give to google this list so it penalize the sites.

I used the same ip address.

BigDave




msg:122715
 1:02 am on Jan 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

The reason that I asked if it was blogger is because Google *owns blogger*.

Google has the log files, and they will have a record of the IP addresses of the people that spam the blogs. If the IP addr of the spammer matches the address of the site they are spamming, then that is proof positive.

Your actions are damaging one of their properties, so it would make sense for them to penalize your site.

plumsauce




msg:122716
 3:08 am on Jan 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Big Dave,


Are you unable to tell the difference between things you do to actually improve your site and a "trick"?

Of course.


Just because google does not catch you (currently) does not mean that it is in the grey area. Even if it is in the grey area, you should understand that you are the one taking a chance when you play in the fog.

Actually, I only play in the clear blue sky.

My *problem*, should you wish to call it that, is
simply that things that are known to work
or guidelines are refered to as rules.

This may be purely semantics, but semantics affects
perception.

Further, my earlier point is, and remains, that it
is useful to consider that organisations have a
tendency to promulgate directives when they cannot
accomplish their goals unilaterally. Therefore,
studying the guidelines with this in mind, *may*
yield some useful clues as to current weaknesses
in their abilities. The *may* is emphasised.

+++

BigDave




msg:122717
 4:21 am on Jan 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Further, my earlier point is, and remains, that it
is useful to consider that organisations have a
tendency to promulgate directives when they cannot
accomplish their goals unilaterally. Therefore,
studying the guidelines with this in mind, *may*
yield some useful clues as to current weaknesses
in their abilities. The *may* is emphasised.

Oh, there is no question that this is true, and no one ever seemed to say otherwise.

BUT, if you go against the "rules" (it is their game, therefore the rules are what they decide), even if you are not caught, you are still going against them. Then if you get caught at a later time, *it is your own fault*.

He spammed blogs. He admitted he spammed blogs. He feels he was caught for spamming blogs. Some people seem to think this is unfair because "innocent" people might get caught. Well, we haven't heard any evicence of an innocent person getting caught, only a guilty one. He broke a rule, a rule set by the cops, judge, jury and executioner. He doesn't even have to know that it is a rule for it to be a rule.

rfgdxm1




msg:122718
 4:42 am on Jan 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

>Google has the log files, and they will have a record of the IP addresses of the people that spam the blogs. If the IP addr of the spammer matches the address of the site they are spamming, then that is proof positive.

I doubt in the real world that the IPs used by spammers to spam blogs is in the same block the servers are on very often.

Evergreen




msg:122719
 3:36 am on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

So isn't this blogging issue a lot like the guestbook issue we discussed about a year ago or so. And didn't we come to the conclusion that signing guestbooks would do you no good in the SERPS? I also don't see why it should hurt since a competitor could do damage to you by spamming your URL to blogs. I would think Google would just build an algo to ignore them.

The same goes for spamming message boards. I had no idea there was so much trash being posted on message boards. Links to Viagra and enlarge your *** sites all over them. Yet at this point I don't see Google filtering out these links. A competitor in my industry ranks #1 with a huge number of these backlinks showing up when you search for his backlinks.

I hope Google will soon figure out how to filter out both blogs and message boards.

BigDave




msg:122720
 5:23 am on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

I hope Google will soon figure out how to filter out both blogs and message boards.

I certainly hope not. On Webmaster World (which is a message board in case you didn't notice) there is a tendancy to only think in terms of how things can be used to spam.

And while there is only a limited amount of useful content on guestbooks. Blogs and message boards are some of the largest sources of useful, up-to-date information on the web.

Slashdot is a blog. Groklaw is a blog. And Dave Barry's blog kindly passes PR to a lot of pages that I find to be quite hilarious.

As for useful message boards, in addition to webmaster world, I generally end up finding answers to my programming questions on message boards rather than on official pages.

For example, about the only good information out there on blocking e-mail address harvesters is on the boards. If you go with the static pages on various websites, you will only come up with information that is at least several months old.

plumsauce




msg:122721
 7:37 am on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)


Big Dave,


He broke a rule, a rule set by the cops, judge, jury and executioner. He doesn't even have to know that it is a rule for it to be a rule.

And now, we get to the crux of the matter,
even though it has taken the long way round.

These words bring to mind, such other words as:
Spanish Inquisition, McCarthyism, Alice in Wonderland,
and Weapons of Mass Destruction.

So, between the IPO, dollars wasted on SEO,
dollars wasted on bad searches, how much money
is Google going to suck out of the economy
this year?

As you can see, I love conspiracy theories :)

+++

BigDave




msg:122722
 7:58 am on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

And on my websites, I have even tougher policies than google does. Hey, look here, Webmaster World has some strict policies too. If you come into my living room and start asserting your "free speech rights", and I disagree, you will find out how quickly I can be cop, judge, jury and executioner too. I don't have to tell you ahead of time what sort of speech is not allowed in my living room. It is my room and my rules.

Google is not a goverment agency, nor are they governed by contract law in their SERPs.

They are a site that gives their opinion on what I might be looking for when I enter a search term. Most of the time, I like their opinion, therefore I go back to them often.

You can have all the conspiracy theories that you want, it doesn't make one bit of difference. When it comes to what goes on their site, all that matters is what Google thinks.

Your only option is to use them or not.

Evergreen




msg:122723
 5:24 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

I certainly hope not. On Webmaster World (which is a message board in case you didn't notice) there is a tendancy to only think in terms of how things can be used to spam.

I guess I wasn't very clear in my post - I didn't mean to suggest that Google filter out blogs and message boards from their SERPS - those can be very useful.

What I meant to suggest is that Google should be able to filter out the spammy links on those blogs and bbs so that the sites that are spamming them don't get a PR boost ahead of those who are developing content rich, honest sites. I rank quite well for my search terms, but I'm still consistently outranked by a guy who spams blogs and message and has virtually no content on his site. Even though I continue to add fresh content to my site, it seems I'll never be able to compete with the 100s of keyword-ladden links he has posted to blogs and message boards in response to topics that have absolutely nothing to do with his industry.

It just rubs me wrong that bad behavior would be rewarded like this, and it isn't helping Google produce the best results in their SERPS either. And I guess that should be Google's main concern with this issue.

madone




msg:122724
 7:33 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

Googleguy said to send email to webmaster@google.com but look they don't provide to assist you. Thanks google you brake my business for long time.

[edited by: oilman at 6:09 pm (utc) on Feb. 23, 2004]
[edit reason] no email quotes please [/edit]

BigDave




msg:122725
 8:22 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

You just said
Thanks google you brake my business for long time.

But in your first post you said
Hello, i tried to post as message in different blogs my own websites.

I'm sorry, but you were the one that broke your business. Google has no contractural responsibility to list your pages.

Buy advertising.

madone




msg:122726
 8:44 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

yes but you know, adwords don't accept this kind of sites.

If there is a problem there is a solution for this. Which is the solution?

I can pay google to re-rank my sites :-)

dirkz




msg:122727
 8:53 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

> If there is a problem there is a solution for this. Which is the solution?

Blog-spamming can't be penalized. I think you have to look somewhere else. Maybe your site was just down.

dirkz




msg:122728
 8:55 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

> What I meant to suggest is that Google should be able to filter out the spammy links on those blogs and bbs so that the sites that are spamming them don't get a PR boost

How would you implement an algo to sort spammy links from good ones?

If you could, Google will hire you instantly :)

Arnett




msg:122729
 8:59 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

If posting a url to a blog is spamming then why does the new version of the toolbar include a button to add a url to blogger.com (which they own by the way)

madone




msg:122730
 9:28 pm on Jan 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

look this is the black list.

http://www.jayallen.org/comment_spam/blacklist.txt

This black list is present in many blogs.

[edited by: engine at 6:35 pm (utc) on Feb. 23, 2004]
[edit reason] de-linked [/edit]

BigDave




msg:122731
 10:16 pm on Feb 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

madone,

I suggest that you read the "charter" link at the top of this page.

In the meantime, here are some quick guidelines as to post types and phrases that might trigger an action:
<snip>
# Personal pleas: the site in my profile - can you sticky me the url or offering to stickymail the url to look.
<snip>
# pleas to specific users such as a mod or Google representative.

goneaway




msg:122732
 6:05 pm on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)

The blacklist that Madone keeps referencing is a per blog installation although most folks make their blacklists publically available. I'm actually hacking on another backend that will periodically check differences between the master list and the local copy.

GoogleGuy




msg:122733
 6:19 pm on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)

madone, you say in your initial message that you went around signing a lot of blogs, and now your site isn't doing as well as before. It could be one of two things: over the last few weeks, Google has started deploying better technology that negates the effect of blog comment spamming. The changes haven't fully rolled out yet, but it could be that your site just isn't doing as well now that the blog comments aren't doing your site any benefit anymore. The other possibility is that if you did enough blog comments to show up in the blacklist mentioned earlier, or if someone filed a spam report about your site, Google could have investigated, verified that the comments were done by the site in question (you admit this in your first post) and taken manual action to correct the spam.

I'd suggest that you read
[google.com...]
especially the parts "Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings." and "Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank." Most of Google's effort in this area has been at updating our algorithms to spot and negate this type of spam automatically (i.e. no human in the loop). But Google does take blog comment spam seriously. If you really overdid it (and no offense, but by saying that you did it and that bloggers were sharing information about your site--that's pretty serious), then you could have triggered someone manually investigating. My hunch would be that our automatic algorithms just removed the blog comments links though, and now your site isn't doing as well. That's more likely.

This 81 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 81 ( 1 [2] 3 > >
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