| 8:23 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing wild painful shuffling on the 188.8.131.52 (Spamfest) datacenter.
I'm seeing mild pleasant shuffling on the 184.108.40.206 (Octoberfest) datacenter.
If the results on 220.127.116.11 stick I'll be cracking open a bottle of Wurtzburger Hofbrau Pure Bavarian.
If the results on 18.104.22.168 stick I'll be cracking open a bottle of paracetamol.
| 8:28 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I agree that 104 is the better of the two right now. Though still not convinced that dropping my site improved the SERPS! ;-)
| 8:36 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Seems like the 22.214.171.124 & 126.96.36.199 data center serps have spread to 188.8.131.52 & 184.108.40.206 aswell!
| 8:41 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
220.127.116.11 I like.
18.104.22.168 I Don't, but it seems to have spred as mentioned.
Would anybody care to declare this an update or a temporary thing?
| 8:50 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
can someone sticky me the terms they are using, I am not seeing any change with my terms
| 9:04 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I dont think we are in any kind of update right now, your are right the 104 does show a little change sometimes, but it has been that way for month.
So NO UPDATE NOW, sorry
| 9:08 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I agree with zeus, no update!.
| 9:11 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
A repeat of message #12.
If by "major changes" you mean: the regular, daily minor changes and additions. Yes, I see an update.
| 9:30 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I love it when someone sees no change in their one area and assumes everyone else is just imagining the changes they're reporting.
Seeing major shift in my area with results rotating between 3 distinct ranking patterns - so yes something is most definitely happening in MY area.
| 9:42 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Results in my area seem to be shifting with some of my sites but it doesn't look like a major event. Rankpulse doesn't show anything significant.
| 9:45 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It seems to be mainly the sites that were affected in the mid-December algo change that are seeing changes on these datacenters. If you didn't see any changes in your area in mid-December, you may not see anything unusual on these datacenters today. If you were badly affected by the mid-December blip, then you may see positive results on these datacenters today. (my observation only)
| 9:56 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
To expand on dazzlindonna's comment, I'd like to know if this has had a negative affect exclusively on sites that were previously displaying sandbox symptons before mid-December. IOW, have these sites been sent back to the sandbox?
| 10:01 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I see changes, but if it's an update or not, I cannot tell.
What I do see is that the 22.214.171.124 DC returns 4,280 pages (lots of them supplemental9 for one of my domains 126.96.36.199 shows 901 pages. However, this difference is visible between .com and .se as well.
Where I see differences for my own sites, I like the 188.8.131.52 DC better. However, either the site: command is broken on that DC or Sandboxing is acting really strange there. Sites that show up pages with the link: command and for normal searches return nothing with the site:www.mydomain.com search.
Also, I see differences in the descriptions in SERPs between these two datacenters.
| 10:01 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
IF there has been a big update, the posting here would go nuts and with all the troubles google has with hijacking/redirecting/url only/a lot of supplemental results... we woild see a lot more happening in the serps if they where to clean up.
| 10:06 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I agree there is no major update happening. As a rule, a change in the # of backlinks almost always precedes an update, followed by fluctuations in the toolbar pagerank. Both of these are constant at all datacenters.
There is no update other than daily flux (but maybe its a little more eratic than normal). One interesting thing i notices was the sort order of the backlinks changed.
| 10:16 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What we're seeing is not a daily flux (listen to dazzlindonna). For those of us destroyed in the December 'limited update' this is significant - I have one site that went from 8,000 Google referrals a day to 400 - this has returned to #1 on many phrases. I also have other sites where I can see no discernable change in rankings.
So, another limited update - whether you attribute this to glitch or filter is up to you. If your sites weren't hit in December you will barely notice this.
| 10:24 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Excatly, i had lost all my tarffic in aug update got it back on dec gone again...in this update. So dont tell me this is a minor update!
| 10:27 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
yeh i see changes..
1 site that had dissapeared in Aug and back in Dec is still there.
1 site that dissapeared in Dec is now back!
| 10:33 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing some improvement in SERPs and a return of some of the traffic that I lost 17 December (a day that saw a decrease in traffic to a third of 'normal' Google traffic.
Hoping it lasts
| 10:43 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Same here, traffic at one of my sites was cut in half beginning December 16th, and today it is returning.
| 10:51 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Changes are of quite varying magnitudes in the 20+ categories we watch closely. Our sites look pretty stable so far, but lots of activity swirling around us.
|I wonder if those seeing "massive changes" have any commonality? |
Looks to me as though authority sites are playing a bigger role, insofar as they have popped up a bit here and there, and are also helping the sites that they link to. May be true of hub sites as well.
A related guess is that those nofollow tags could conceiveably already be playing a role here, such that the balance has shifted away from sites that benefitted greatly by weak and/or dubious inbounds. (However, not sure that those tags could have an effect so fast.)
| 11:00 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
my backlinks went up by exactly one on 3 out of 4 of my sites on 184.108.40.206.
| 11:07 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
seeing minor movement for root index pages, but nothing for inner pages
the difference in SERP result numbers seems to indicate the start of a minor update - no massive changes in results as before a real update, but then Ive seen them playing with a few indexes the last few days that did show massive number changes but they would only last an hour or so.
| 11:13 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|It seems to be mainly the sites that were affected in the mid-December algo change that are seeing changes on these datacenters. |
This seems to be what we are seeing to. We are seeing the results live as of now.
| 11:21 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes the results are spreading out quickly for the moment.
It's not just a reversal of Dec pain for sites that got hit in Dec.: Some that got hit in Dec. are still gone, while others that were healthy up to and thru Dec. are now abruptly vanished with this new set of results.
| 11:26 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|..are now abruptly vanished with this new set of results |
Would seem my site, which has been an authority up until now, has been removed completely. Very odd - unique content and completely whitehat. No server downtime over the past month so I can see no reason why this might be, robots.txt is fine, and Googlebot is crawling the site at this very moment.
Perfect timing for me to hop on the MSN bandwagon.
| 11:33 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
As has ours, in the index for years, loyal customers...
Googleguy where r u now?
| 11:39 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I am seeing lots of movement where I play, and lots of fake review sites jumping up to the top. This one's just plain ugly.
| 11:41 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Now that all of us webmasters have helped so much in making them a public company by giving them our content to use, they've got no time for us anymore?
Or at least it feels that way.
| 11:48 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
seems like they're alternating taking sites off the index /demoting them for no reason. You can't say I didn't do my share, almost 6 months and now FINALLY my index is ranking where it should be, the rest will follow....I hope.
| 11:59 pm on Feb 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Walkman: Was this the site you lost around about September 23rd? If so then I too am seeing my site lost around then creeping back in and ranking well. It looks to me as if the sites which were only ranking well with &filter=0 after the URL and now ranking well on there own.