| 2:37 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If nobody rats him out, Google will never know about it.
| 2:42 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
learn from it.
Thats not to say that you duplicate it.
By the time you fill out a spam report and sit on your hands waiting for the googlegods to remove your competition, you could apply what you have learned from the so-called "spam" and rank higher than the bad guy (you could probably use pictures too).
| 4:05 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
john316, do you perhaps mean - use alt tags, as per standard web design? Link accessibilty might also be an issue here zeus.
| 4:26 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If you aren't willing to report this to Google, then no, they are unlikely to "find" the site and remove it. The algo changes may eventually catch it, but until then, you need to find a way to work around him.
I definately would not suggest using this site's methods on your own site, as who is to say he would hesitate to report you if you used the same methods?
As excell said (hi excell! welcome to WebmasterWorld ;) ), make certain that you are taking advantage of every legitimate means of SEO available to you. Spammers make it harder to get to the top, they don't make it impossible.
| 4:29 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
thanks for the welcome :) (thought I would pick an easy one)
| 4:34 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>If you aren't willing to report this to Google, then no, they are unlikely to "find" the site
I am pretty sure in competitive categories reporting spam (and anything related to it) is very common. There are 9 (or more) angry webmasters ready to hit that spam button per every spammmed first position...
If they don't play fair chances are extremely high they were reported already. But, if it makes you feel better, join in :) (I mean spam reporting, not spamming).
| 4:35 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>If you aren't willing to report this to Google, then no, they are unlikely to "find" the site and remove it.
It has repeatedly been stated from Google' side that Google prefers not to act on sites manually. Instead they try to approach the problem with slight tweaks of the algo/filters.
It's obvious that a human reviewing each and every snitch and complaint would blow Google's cost controll out of the water in no time.
Yes, they most likely will do a manual removal or penalty every once in a while. And that's it.
[edited by: heini at 4:40 pm (utc) on Nov. 1, 2002]
| 4:37 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
They obviously would prefer it be automated. However, Google also has that link on every SERP to report spam. I presume they usually check those out.
| 4:41 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Regardless of the competitivness of the term and the resulting action by google, they openly invite the public to report any problems, spam or errors. Thejenn is correct to say to do so. (IMO)
| 4:53 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Excell, welcome to the board!
No doubt. The question is what does Google do with those complaints?
I think it's twofold: collecting info, hot areas, competitive seo KWs, also blatant cases of spammming, perhaps even general user satisfaction measurement ( though I doubt the latter somehwat, this is more what those smileys where made for)
And then it's a good tool for webmasters and promoters to vent frustration ;), perhaps even distracts them from applying unethical methods themselfes.
[edited by: heini at 4:55 pm (utc) on Nov. 1, 2002]
| 4:53 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the replys, well I just have to do a better work on my site, because I would NEVER do any tricks to get a better ranking and I know my site is more popular then the spammers site, that must be the goal for a webmaster, right.
| 4:55 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
thks heini, and yes if it helps google in the long term it's good.
zeus - yes that the right attitude... go for it!
| 5:05 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
While its certainly up to the individual, Googleguy, on many occasions, has encouraged us to report spam and trickery.
| 5:30 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I am seeing a site #1 on the serp for one key-keyword.
- 15 domains all linking to each other
- almost identical content
- hard stuff is: he is hiding the (always identical) linkblock with style-sheet seize=1 and td-backround-color = text-color.
it's not my thing to report spam so do you guys think google will find this automatically?
| 5:34 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Rat him out, Bernie.
| 5:43 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
On a sidenote: The title of this thread absolutely made my day...still sniggering.. Thanks Zeus!
There is one site that always ranks better than our site
Sounds pretty much like a precise summary of a webpromoters life.
Even if we're #1 for all your pet KW, we inevitably find some slot where we're not....
| 6:34 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Zeus, I respect your preference not to report him.
Consider this, though - as more questionable sites get reported, the likelihood that google will come up with better filters is pretty good.
| 7:10 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I would tend to agree that Google doesn't have some one sitting around reading every single spam report and then removing them from the directory.
What I DO believe happens is that Google makes use of said spam reports to find the weaknesses in the algo that are currently being exploited by the spammers. This is what allows them to decide what areas of the algo need tweaking before the next update. So, report away...but realize that you aren't likely to see that site dissapear tomorrow...what IS likely is that somewhere down the road, you, and other frustrated SEOs will notice that folks employing such tricks have suddenly gone *poof*! :)
| 8:08 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Re xLinking, seeing as my w/end is going to be spent on exactly that, I thought I'd get your thoughts if possible on the following diagram:
[Mods I hope this is ok]
Ignoring PR for now, some assumptions are:
Each of the <Company> sites have 10 or so inbound links from other small sites (not portrayed)
Each <Brand> site is heavily themed for its Company site
All <Brand "Site Pages"> have 1 link to its Company site
The <Brand> Sites are not xLinked
1 Solitary Links page <In Blue> links to all the <Brand> sites in the network, to prevent orphan pages.
My Q - How would G view a small network of sites built in this way?
Good, bad, what might trip a filter?
| 8:51 pm on Nov 1, 2002 (gmt 0)|
wingslevel Heini thanks,
I also think that with time Google will have a filter that will filter them out, because I will still not report them you never know what impact that could have for them and I still respect every company in my categorie.
The thing Im afried of is now Google is almost perfect if they keep trying to make there filter better it will also harm alot of "good" web sites with not that much knowlege in the web business, but they also have the right to tell there story or make a little busness, we can not expect every webmaster to be so SE experinced like some here, so in a way I do not hope they do to many changes in there ranking/filtering system, because it is the best search engine on the net, we all know that, so never change a wining them.
I just have to make the site better.