| 2:08 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the GoogleGram
Now if we just had a GoogleCAM.
Pointed at the red button, of course.
| 2:11 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Any chance we will see the loss of many a site now using such tactics as well? (Many time reported, for so long and yet without any result).
| 2:11 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
good to know you're around and listening googleguy.
keep up the good work!
| 2:13 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The 48hrs seems to have turned into 24hrs.
| 2:18 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The best argument i know of for cloning....
| 2:23 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
googleguy, i'd love to give you the long list of domains that have been using those tricks and getting under your radar since i first noticed them last summer .. and i've basically given up on using those google spam reports because month in month out they remain in the index
annnnyhhoooww .. i' havent put much effort into getting those guys out, just more effort on using my legitimate methods to outrank them .. and i've been having some success at it ... but it still annoys me when i have #2 and #3 and they're #4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 up to 20 with their spam :-)
| 2:26 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
fathom is right. This is no time to grumble.
[edited by: annej at 2:47 am (utc) on Mar. 6, 2003]
| 2:28 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think we all owe Brett some graditute for bringing the SE's (mostly Google and GoogleGuy), webmasters, and SEO's together here at webmasterworld.
I think Google as a company really understands that a lot of small businesses are almost completely dependent on Google for visitors. And by offering information like this plus lifting past bans they are really make some huge leaps forward.
| 2:31 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
by the way .. quick question
lets say there are a whole ton load of domains with redirects (or maybe its cloaking, i have no clue) .. anyhow, these domains are all ranking well with lots of pages and sub-domains in the index ... BUT .. these pages all redirect to a particular domain .. lets say that domain is XYZ.com
now ... XYZ.com is clearly benefitting from all these spam/re-directs or whatever but when and if google bans anybody, they're banning the domain that is doing the re-direct .. is that right?
it would be good, especially in the case of this XYZ domain if you could figure out some way of banning these domains that are benefiting the spam .. without ending up with a ban on a site that a competitor decided to get kicked by pointing the redirects at him
hmm ... hope you're following .. lol
| 2:37 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
This shouldn't be a thread to post about spam, or complain about spam.
I doubt GG will continue his pre-update posts, if the expected replies are of this nature.
Brett did! (at SES) :)
[edited by: Marcia at 4:31 am (utc) on Mar. 6, 2003]
| 2:38 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
You are the man GG.
Thanks for the heads up and continued monitoring of this site. Now go down to the lab and let the update/deep crawl cycle get back on the lunar calender.
| 2:50 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Excellent news GG, and I'm sure that many a web master will be excited for that news.
Now, all you've got to do is find a way to make the updates happen more frequently... Not constant, but even every other week would be a good way to get things going. I'm sure it is exponentially more difficult than simply flicking that "update" switch we all imagine.
And hey, gettin' gusty with the StickyMail going back on 'eh? :)
Take care, and thanks for the valued info.
| 3:00 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Happy to help. If I run across other interesting things that can lower the average blood pressure at WebmasterWorld, I'll post whatever info I can. People tend to get a little antsy around update time.. :)
| 3:10 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the update, GG.
Question: if a webmaster e-mails to that addy with details, what are the chance of getting a reply with advice on:
a. if the domain is penalised
b. if anything can be done about it?
| 3:14 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It would be interesting to know if Google was able to grab the recent DMOZ RFD this time around?
| 3:16 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
LETS DANCE! ANYONE NEED A PARTNER?
| 3:18 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
This is great to hear, GoogleGuy. Sometimes clients get caught up in methods they don't understand, then they endure the consequences. Glad to see there is a way to fix situations through Google.
| 3:20 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|People tend to get a little antsy around update time... |
Nahhh, not us! ;)
Glad to hear about the planned improvement in response mechanism. I have few complaints about Google, but the autoresponse/no response issue seemed really out of keeping with the quality standards set by the rest of the company. Thanks for stopping by, GG, and "feeling our pain". :)
| 3:32 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Googleguy, Any chance you call tell us what the sentences are? 3 months in jail, 6 months, etc, before being released? :)
I would like to if sites are penalized for certain periods of time until Google feels they've served their sentence.... or is it more of a "let's be generous and give all these guys a second chance" thing? Like taking all convicts off death row? :)
| 3:42 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Oh great GoogleGuy. So you mean to say the governor has pardoned a bunch of cheaters who had been given the Google Death Penalty and they will again be allowed to dishonestly dominate the SERPs again? Too bad for all the honest webmasters who'd have been happy to pull the lever to give them the chair. Probably won't make a difference to me, but I can imagine better news.
| 3:42 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm with fathom. I've got a half dozen new listings in DMOZ and am most anxious to see if they're in the directory this go around.
GoogleGuy, I take Norvasc and Atacand HCT. I've had to double up on my meds since the 20th. That gets expesive. Please take it easy on us hypertensive types next month!
| 3:45 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>I'm with fathom. I've got a half dozen new listings in DMOZ and am most anxious to see if they're in the directory this go around.
I'm an ODP editor. We are the Rodney Dangerfield's of the Internet, and get no respect. My guess is no.
| 3:50 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
rfgdxm1, I wouldn't assume that the pardoned sites are serious cheaters. The real cheaters abandon penalized domains and move on to new ones. My guess is that many of the pardoned domains are smaller scale businesses that either unknowingly did something that looked dodgy or read an out-of-date SEO guide and tried an obsolete technique.
| 3:52 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm with Fathom too,
but ODP should be downgraded as part of the algo not up upgraded. rfgdxm1, I feel for you, but ODP these days reminds me of 1996 (7,8.or 9)...where perception of value was better than value itself.
i know....not germain... i think i caught the dance bug through osmosis. not like me....
[edited by: Chicago at 3:54 am (utc) on Mar. 6, 2003]
| 3:53 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
right-o, rogerd. These are mostly small-scale businesses. You'll be happy to hear that I believe that we did get a newer RDF dump of the ODP. I don't know how new it is, but it should be fresher than before.
| 3:55 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
<-- You'll be happy to hear that I believe that we did get a newer RDF dump of the ODP
excellent news, thanks GG
| 4:01 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It's funny to say but I am more excited about the new directory than the dance. I've got a few sites in the new dump in some categories that should bring some decent traffic.
[edited by: nipear at 4:11 am (utc) on Mar. 6, 2003]
| 4:09 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>right-o, rogerd. These are mostly small-scale businesses. You'll be happy to hear that I believe that we did get a newer RDF dump of the ODP. I don't know how new it is, but it should be fresher than before.
*I'm* an ODP editor (at least last I checked my password still worked, so I guess that means I still am.) Last I checked "fresh" would mean more recent than fall, 2002. Google has updated beyond that?
| 4:14 am on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
> newer RDF dump of the ODP.
That is the best news I have heard in months.
Thank you, thank you , thank you.
| This 117 message thread spans 4 pages: 117 (  2 3 4 ) > > |