homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.73.87.85
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe and Support WebmasterWorld
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 85 message thread spans 3 pages: 85 ( [1] 2 3 > >     
Problem Results Reports
phish




msg:127446
 8:58 am on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Ive been reporting a site for the last 5 updates...I sent them the EXACT link to the site...when you do a search and this particular site comes up then you click on the "more from this site" link 360 pages of keyword stuffed junk pages come up, and they do nothing about it. BLATENT spam and google does zippo. Now I look thru some of these for about an hour so...and this guy is using text from competitors sites in some of these pages..actual company names and stuff. Why dont they listen? I read the thread Brett started last night and GG jumped in and asked what Google can do.."give us some suggestions" he said. Well if you look at Brett's original post it was that when he does a search on a certain phrase he really has to get deep into a search to find anything relavant. Why is this? Because of people like this.So if Google is looking for something to do instead of adding on more stuff..they should just take care of what they already have. Quit relying 100% on the algo, and do more human editing.

peace

 

steveb




msg:127447
 12:19 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

"this guy is using text from competitors sites in some of these pages..actual company names and stuff. Why dont they listen?"

Because you are reporting something that isn't spam according to them!

Read their guidelines. Why do you think putting a bunch of drivel on pages breaks the rules? Why do you think plaigarized content breaks the rules?

Mirrors, cloaking, hidden text... that is spam. The spam report form works great -- for reporting what Google calls spam. People who complain about it seem to be very often (not always) concerned about what Google does not consider reportable spam.

Spam and garbage are not the same thing.

WindSun




msg:127448
 12:26 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

"this guy is using text from competitors sites..."

However, that alone might be grounds for copyright infringement.

Pegasus




msg:127449
 12:29 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Do what I do - give them a ":(" with the toolbar.

I think Google should check text to see if it has common words in it. If a paragraph has no instances of any of the following:

a, the, and, in, at, of, if, when, what to, on, in, was, is, has, etc.

Then it should be destroyed by Uncle Spam

jady




msg:127450
 12:35 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Phish - dont feel bad - I (and other colleagues) have been reporting one competetor for about 5 months now also. They are using hidden text on their site packed with keywords. (White text on white background) and ranking #1 for our keywords!

aspdesigner




msg:127451
 12:46 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

If they are using text stolen right from competitor's web sites, or improperly using the trademarked names of competitor's companies, then contact those competitors and let them know about it! They can file a DMCA notice with Google, which will get acted on a LOT faster than a spam complaint!

They can read about how to file a DMCA notice with Google here -

[google.com...]

robertito62




msg:127452
 12:59 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Pegasus, I am confused.

"...Do what I do - give them a "" with the toolbar.
I think Google should check text to see if it has common words in it. If a paragraph has no instances of any of the following:

a, the, and, in, at, of, if, when, what to, on, in, was, is, has, etc.

Then it should be destroyed by Uncle Spam..."

A sitemap page usually has none of the above, may not even have paragraphs, however both for users and search engines it might be the most useful page on any site. Where is the spam?

Better to devote time developing content :)

running scared




msg:127453
 1:18 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Do what I do - give them a ":(" with the toolbar.

Interesting, I do that as well. I wonder how many others do. Not sure it is making any difference though!

robertito62 - this is referring to using the voting functions on the toolbar. Can't remember but it may be one of the advanced features that you have to set up.

robertito62




msg:127454
 1:19 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

running_scared,
learning something new every day. Thanks.

hetzeld




msg:127455
 1:37 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Pegasus,

I've got plenty of those paragraphs... as long as they aren't written in Englisn, you cannot expect paragraphs to contain those words, don't you? ;)

Dan

Pegasus




msg:127456
 1:42 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

I know lots of forms of text will have no common words in them, but that text will rarely be in paragraph form.

I think it would be easy to tell what language text is in. The Google translator seems to be able to. :)

phish




msg:127457
 2:06 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

let me clear this up. I was really ticked off when I wrote the post and didn't make myself clear.Lets say you search on "blue widgets" and you get a site called "orange stuff that has nothing to do with widgets" in the top ten results...then you click on more from this site, and it has 360 different pages more than half of them you click on and they are just pages loaded line after line with keywords..not even hidden text, but keywords stuffed in plain view. The part about using company names from competitors...my sites name for innstance is being used in the meta description of more than one of these keyword pages...so when you see the indexed page and look at the dscription youre seeing the competitors name..now who does Google think those redirects are coming from? Thats my concern. If anyone would like the URL sticky mailed to look be my guest let me know.

-phish

awoyo




msg:127458
 4:02 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

I'm sure that when google developed their Page Rank algo they considered, at least in some small part, the propensity for abuse. I don't think they considered the nut who would be willing to purchase a hundred domain names in order to build a spam farm. Or that there would be a hundred more to follow in his/her example. Page Rank is a beautiful thing, in theory, but the cat is most assuredly out of the bag, and as a result, when g created PR, they unwittingly created a monster.

So what can google do? Well, they can't respond to what I'm sure is a flood of spam complaints. At least not on an efficient scale. It seems (by todays serps) that there would a billion of them to deal with. For one thing, most of the people complaining about seo-spam are the webmaster jockeying for position in the serps. That alone opens the door for even more abuse. Imagine the time it would take to hand check every complaint. And, to employ a "safe" measure of penalty in this post Bob Massa atmosphere, would be enough to drive anybody nuts.

Do they tweak the algo to eliminate certain "link farm" structured sites? I'm sure they can, but to get it right and leave the innocent alone would be a daunting task. Especially with the knowledge that someone will figure out the new algo just as fast as they figured out the old one, buy a hundred more domain names and go at it again. Google would be like the proverbial dog chasing his tail, round and round.

I'll tell you what, and I hate to say it, but I think we need to seriously look at some kind of regulation. To say that we need to make spam illegal is way too simple. But consider legislation that said that by spamming googles serps, a website owner is compromising, destroying, or altering, the intended purpose of googles patented technology. Some people would still try it, but if there were a few convictions with stiff monetary penalties enforced, I'll bet it would make spammers think twice before they spammed google again.

Google doesn't do anything to fix what's wrong because it's not Google that's broken, although I still get plenty mad at google for garbage serps, and lots of them, it's the spammers that are impeding googles ability to serve me the information I need.

phish




msg:127459
 4:42 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

very well said awoyo,

heres the thing I still dont agree with..instead of doing nothing they should make an attempt. The purpose of webmasters jockeying for position though is not always the case. Even as an avid user of Google for my searches, I get frustrated having to go 4 or 5 pages deep to get results I'm lookig for on popular searches that turn up 100,000 plus results.Google made the rules..e-commerce relies very heavily on Google, and yes position is important because alot of people's livelyhoods depend on it, but it's also affecting what made Google what it is today. My whole point is that they need to take firmer actions against spam. i do feel and I will say it again, that they rely too much on the algo doing the work. They need to take actions that will make people think twice about doing it again if they get caught. We should have an enviornment where everyone has a level playing field.

-phish

Yidaki




msg:127460
 5:03 pm on Feb 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

phish,

>search on "blue widgets" and you get a site called "orange stuff
>that has nothing to do with widgets" in the top ten results...
>then you click on more from this site, and it has 360 different
>pages more than half of them you click on and they are just
>pages loaded line after line with keywords ...

Why do you click "more" if the title of the result allready says that it's irrelevant and not worth a click? Just move to the next result - remember, there are ten results per page. ;)

If they disturb you because they hold "your" position just build a better site with real content and target a wider range of keywords related to the "top word(s)" - you'll get more and better traffic and it'll be better for your nerves. ;)

<added>
>they rely too much on the algo doing the work.
>They need to take actions that will make people think twice ...

Impossible! Google crawls and indexes 3+ bill pages every month. They plan to get bigger and crawl more and more. Scoring so many pages MUST be done by a machine.

aspdesigner




msg:127461
 11:17 am on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

phish, if they are stuffing other company's products and names into meta tags and keyword lists as you describe for the sole purpose of coming up high on a search when people search for other company's products, this can get them in MAJOR hot water!

There have been a # of cases where spammers have been sued for this sort of thing!

One judge described this practice as the same as a shop owner posting a sign with another company's trademark in front of its shop.

You may want check out this article [nolo.com] about this topic -

You should also try searching in Google for -

meta tag lawsuit

and you will find plenty of information about this subject.

If they did this with your own trademarks, you may want to consider one or more of the following -

* Sending them a letter demanding they remove it

* Conside pursuing legal action against them

* Look into filing a DMCA complaint with Google to remove these listings

* Look into filing a DMCA complaint with their hosting company to have the offending site "taken down"

Using someone else's trademarks to steal search results from them is a lot more serious that spamming.

[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 11:45 am (utc) on Feb. 22, 2003]
[edit reason] url fixed [/edit]

Brett_Tabke




msg:127462
 11:46 am on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

>BLATENT spam and google does zippo.

Since Google has never detailed what it thinks are problem results or tactics, how do you know it's a problem?

aspdesigner




msg:127463
 3:15 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Thanks for the edit, Brent, that URL went on forever...

You're actually in a better spot when a competitor does something this blatant. No need to worry about spam interpretations, just slap 'em with a take-down notice - problem solved!

phish




msg:127464
 3:24 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Brett
I dont know that it's a problem in Google's eyes, but I'm sure everyone in here would agree it is. <snip>

[edited by: ciml at 3:51 pm (utc) on Feb. 22, 2003]
[edit reason] See charter [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]

GoogleGuy




msg:127465
 6:04 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

phish, it's much harder to investigate claims that someone ripped off the text of a page. If both pages have the same text, how can you prove who ripped off whom? Something like cloaking is detectable for a single site--you don't have to decide between two people making counterclaims. I would start sending your reports to help@google.com instead of to the spam report page. Someone else mentioned our DMCA page, which talks about our policy of responding to DMCA complaints. Be aware that we send all of our DMCA complaints to chillingeffects.org, so any DMCA complaint to Google will be public.

Hope that helps,
GoogleGuy

SEOPTI




msg:127466
 7:23 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

I found 9.000+ cloaked software generated websites spread over 5-8 domains and reported them 2-3 weeks ago, I know other people reported the same sites too, but nothing happened. Just imagine this massive amount spam and all of them are in the top 10. The sites all have exactly the same content. The software changed the title of each webpage and one or two words in the body tag, that's all.

The webmaster must be getting 50.000-70-000 or more unique visitors a day with all the spam.

Seems like sometimes massive Google spamming will pay the bills and a lot more, at least for this guy.

He already did at least $100.000 this month (guess). So he won't cry if Google removes the sites in the future.

nowhere




msg:127467
 8:06 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Some people would still try it, but if there were a few convictions with stiff monetary penalties enforced, I'll bet it would make spammers think twice before they spammed google again.

Convictions from whom, the United Nations? You donít need to submit a site to Google to get indexed; so you would need a law stating that having several html pages on a server with an Internet connection anywhere in the world, that contain links to each other, non-coherent paragraphs, and/or repetitive words would be illegal. Perhaps if there was global communism this would be possible. Until then (lucky us) it ainít gonna happen.

cjtripnewton




msg:127468
 8:11 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

GoogleGuy said, "phish, it's much harder to investigate claims that someone ripped off the text of a page. If both pages have the same text, how can you prove who ripped off whom?"

The law is pretty clear. You send a notice swearing that you have the legal right to publish the content. The copier gets a notice from Google. If they also swear that they have the legal right to publish the content, then it gets sticky, but I haven't run into a cheater with the gonads to do such a thing yet. Time will tell. About once a month I find another "company" out there who has copied a page or two of my company's work. The unfortunate drawback to filing a DMCA complaint is the inevitable hacking attempts that follow... Be sure to button down the hatches first. And make a daily backup.

phish




msg:127469
 9:03 pm on Feb 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

GoogleGuy
My concern is on the spam end and my site name being associated in the text on the spam pages..the person has probably 4 or 5 competitor's names listed in those 360 pages not just mine. What's to say when and if Google does act on it that our sites wont be removed also because of the redirect issue.It's not just the fact that he's using our meta tags on the spammed pages.

-phish

robertito62




msg:127470
 12:27 am on Feb 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

"...my site name being associated in the text on the spam pages..."

Hire a lawyer. What does that have to do with Google?

yankee




msg:127471
 12:51 am on Feb 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Can you use archive.org to prove who had the content first?

aspdesigner




msg:127472
 1:57 am on Feb 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

cjtripnewton, I haven't had the need to do this myself, but if someone was to steal my copyrighted content, or put my company's trademarks in their meta tags so they can steal traffic from me of people searching for my own company, hell yes I'ld do something about it! This isn't spam, its theft! It's rare you will see a thief actually be so bold as to file a counter notification, if they are really guilty, to do so would be legal suicide.

Jane_Doe




msg:127473
 5:26 pm on Feb 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Try just emailing the webmaster copying your content and threaten to report them to their web host, Google and the other major SEs and have their whole site taken offline and removed from all of the major search engines for violating copyright laws, if your stuff isn't removed within x amount of time. I did this recently and my content was removed within 24 hours. I think a lot of people will just follow the path of least resistance and just copy content from somebody less cranky.

Tony_Perry




msg:127474
 3:28 pm on Feb 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

I have become so feedup with sites using hidden text that I opened a freebe email address and what I now do it this: I copy and paste all the hidden text and send it to the offending site. I tell them that I know what they are doing and if they dont remove all spamming methods from the site with 3 days I will fill in a Google spam report and send it off. I put a link to Google spam report so they can check terms and conditions of service for themselves. So far everyone I contacted has removed their spamming! This has saved Google time and effort and has resulted in a fairer market place for all!

try it for yourself and see,

austtr




msg:127475
 12:32 am on Feb 25, 2003 (gmt 0)

Way to go Tony_Perry!

There is a lot to be said for being pro-active in cleaning up your own neighbourhood rather than sitting back, wringing your hands and asking Google to do it for you. I guess the downside is the potential for creating groups of self appointed moral guardians of the index which can, and probably will, turn into self serving attacks on any competitor.

Do you concentrate only on your own pet areas or do you go further afield? What criteria do you apply when deciding what is spam and what is not?

I see enough hidden links to realise that Google's filters miss a lot of hidden stuff and the search results offered to the viewer are starting to become distorted because of it. It may be small change in terms of the big picture... but its an indication that the non-stop barrage of seo manipulation in the commercial areas seems to be influencing results faster than Google can identify and eliminate....

Seeing reports of people taking it into their own hands to bring about remedial actions comes as no surprise at all... now if Google would just change the "guidelines" to read "Site Subission Standards", give them some teeth and publish the results.

"Google found it necessary to remove 2247 sites from the index during Feb 2003 for contravention of our standards. Click here to read our site submission standards before proceeding" This message to be placed on the submission form.

Message to spammers... "when (not if) we catch you, you're gone."

Ah well, we all have our little fantasies, don't we?

This 85 message thread spans 3 pages: 85 ( [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.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved