Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

IF G is TRULY in the process of fixing the problem, after 18 months, there really is no further need to ponder the 'problem'.

>The direct consequence is that ...and no longer get spidered.

Sounds plausible. The site of mine that lost its home page does go down every now and then.

Compliance = (Adwords.budget.profit – company.size/competitor.Adwords.budget)

[google.com...]

The back bone are the webmasters who affect the compliance. Adwords or not. If you do evil – every one should make you go broke and not you should make you competitor go broke. The 302 should only effect the pages on the inside structure of your own domain structure – otherwise I should borrow $500.000 to invest into 5 “nuts” to bring all of my competition and officially be sued for monopoly on selling widgets on the internet due to software compliance of major SEs.

Duplicate content should only count if ……they make the rule….

To people at Google – I want to see a listing of all URLs that point to my site – not just the most important once as “you” think. I also want to see the exact number of pages indexed on my site – all 4714 of them – with exact URL Indexed, Cached Copy and the correct Time when you were here(not 1969). I want to see all WebPages that have my domain name in them, sites that advertise for my domain name, not GEO Content delivery(just got off the phone with my ex-advertiser - she is in LA, I am in NJ, I see the Her Adwords, she does not, she calls her NY Office, They don’t see it, I say go to Google Software to check, she says Ohh. - I want to know when some one Advertises for my domain name in the keywords at all times – I AM DA OWNER – YOU MAKE MONEY)

Do I depend on Google –NO.

Then why would I comply – you come to my site – get content – then say its good for nothing. Last Year We spent more that 2Cents Per URL in G*Index.

But I would really like to see evidence for the "the URL with higher PR wins" theory.

Now, if there was something you could do about this as a webmaster, i would know it, and i would have posted it. Not in this thread, but more than a year ago.

This can only be fixed at the source of the problem, which is neither you nor the page doing the hijack - the source of the problem is Google, MSN and whatever other engine that mixes this up.

- On most DCs we're back on page one for our site name. Even saw it at #1 on a live google.com search. (A pleasent surprise after a month of pages 3 to 11.) Surrounding results are much more relevant than the junk that had been showing up post-Allegra.

- 302s previously ranking for our site name seem to have been beaten down in the SERPs, but still in the index. (But we're still being topped for inurl:domain.com by a site that's framing our home page...that may be a whole other problem.)

- A number of old URLs that I had 301'd and successfully deleted with the remove URL tool have found their way back into the index (hmm...rollback?), though mostly as URL-only or supplemental results.

I am in dispute with alexa about 2 links in google of theirs that contain my URL.

xsltcache.alexa.com/traffic_graph/js/g/a/3m?amzn_id=typicallyspan-20&url=http://www.mysite.com
Similar pages

www.alexa.com/data/details?amzn_id=typicallyspan-20&url=http://www.mysite.com
Similar pages

One is a download and the other goes to the popularity page regarding my site with no description, just a long address. And both are displayed in google inurl: but my actual URL is missing from the results. This is simply not on and I am sure the existance of the alexa links above to be damaging to my site.

As of yet no reply by them. I am sure because my url was detected via their 302 somehow involved in the links, I just cannot work out exactly but am working on it. I will for sure give alexa one last chance to deactivate those links or I will retaliate with my spare server.

My site should appear in results for inurl: it does not and I cannot believe that all is ok. Its name is unique and I do not expect anything else to appear in an inurl: result other than my website.

Completely useless to be in google results but never the less. This only happened because googlebot deemed they should be.

macdave,

None. When Alegra hit I promised I'd site on my hands for a couple months and just ride it out.

Thanks for the braying colloquium in syntax. Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how one would exemplify a multifarious procedure like I described in great detail in layman’s terms so that everybody understood it as best as possible.

You took a colossal thread and picked out a single flaw, and you thought that the terminology was more requisite than the content that many others thought was a revelation, and some regarded as a startling exposure of the processes that cause a problem to their sites.

I should perhaps contribute less in a thread that contains ridicule at others expense. This sort of thing really is uncalled for and you seem to expect that full computer jargon would be understood by the many people that read that post.

In an attempt to make Joe public understand the procedure there seem to be a small flaw in terminology in your eyes, Do you honestly think that all who read the post were unix or apache server engineers? With pedantic code of ethics and dogmatic vocabulary principles.

It is possible. Their is no doubt about it. Many things can cause havoc.

But I stress that no matter how angry we are we must stay as cool as a cucumber.

I was threatened with legal action by a giant affiliate company if I carried out my threat to cause massive 302's to their entire network of webpages 6 levels deep.

They removed all redirects pointing to one of my sites and a truce was established.

Extra credit for style points as well. I like the explanation you gave for the regular folks just fine. I participated ad nauseum about this topic about a year and a half ago calling this the biggest issue nobody wanted to talk about and as I remember Claus was about the first senior here to acknowledge this was an issue. I am glad to see this issue aired out, but I also remember saying the exact thing maybe about a year ago.

Forgot to mention.

It is actually against the law to cause damage of any sort to a large company.

I guarantee you this. Call a large company tomorrow and tell them you are going to cause 302 redirects to their websites and that they should inform their IT department to explain the consequences and what 302 means.

How about a new non-profit company called <insert name> that webhosting services have to join to become a member off. Once those webhosts are a member of said company they, without question, recieve top rankings in serps over any non-member company for any search engine that wants to be labeled <insert name> guaranteed results. Of course any search engine or webhost could opt out of this service with no reprocusion. (this would also include companies that host their own sites, they would have to certified just like the webhosting companies)

Now anybody who wants to host a website on one of these new certified webhosting companies has to pay a mandatory $50 fee per domain to the non-profit company that will go into an escrow account, and after either one year or when they cancel hosting they have this money returned. On the other hand if they are caught making malicious websites they lose the $50 and are kicked off any and all certified webhosting companies for one month and when they come back they will have to pay a $500 deposit. Of course if a webhost is warned that one of it's customers is doing malicious things and they don't kick them off then they simply lose their certification.

I'm not talking about monopolizing the internet, search engines could simply give people a choice to select to only recieve certified results or a mix of both.

Many thanks for your kind words. I take inspiration from your comments.

Yes, I am trying to help whoever I can to understand what is going on with this problem. I have seen website after website disappear in google for no reason other than this.

There was a pattern that stood out like a sore thumb. Long established commercial sites, suddenly drop, no real explanation other than all having many strange long URL's with their URL's trailing in the link. On many of these links there are no title or description, they exist with the lost websites index page as the google cache, meta refresh to the lost site or framed.

I ask you, in the name of fairness, some of these websites I saw this happen to were small commercial websites that went bankrupt. Or the very least a disheartening feeling besets the owner or confused webmaster.

Indeed, you are correct, it does not appear to be illegal to do a 302 redirect to whatever website or page you want. Provided you do not disclose you are doing it.

Knowing the harm it could cause, I feel guilty to point these redirects to sites that do not belong to me.

How about the damage others are causing to SMALL companies... is that NOT against the law?

If I were going to retaliate, I'd start with a Google subsidiary or something they own a controlling stock interest in. That way, not only will they fully understand the ramifications without need for lengthy explanations, but they'll also have a vested interest in FIXING it quick AND noone to blame but themselves!

AdSense policies state ....

"AdSense participants are required to adhere to the webmaster guidelines