ok, i just put my tinfoil beanie on, and want to share some thoughts on this 302 thing. again.
my basic premise is that the 3xx series of messages are part of the http protocol. see rfc 2616. nothing wrong with anyone using these. now wait before you declare me insane, there's more ...
a search engine is supposed to have the core mission of indexing pages and returning references to those pages in response to a search.
with me so far?
now, irrespective of X arbitrary number of redirects of any kind recognised by the crawler of the subject engine, it is the page not the link that should get the final credit.
i don't care if it's a 3xx or meta redirect. if the crawler resolves it then it knows where it ended up because it had to resolve the url to get there.
that's the general case applying to all search engines.
in the particular case of google, they like this ranking by link and anchor text thingie. that's fine, but it has nothing to do with resolving where the page actually lives. and the url of that page should get the credit for the content. that *is* what the user wants is it not?
now, if its a 302, meaning temporarily moved, then fine, still give the final url the credit and try to crawl it again later to see if it still exists.
if the phd wants to differentiate and make things complicated then fine, differentiate between 302's within the same domain and to other domains. or they could use the technology from crossref.org which apparently libraries and scholars use to uniquely identify thingies down to the citation level in scholarly works. but they would have to pay royalties on that.
it's broken. they don't know how to fix it. time to move on.
in the extreme case, just ignore them and design the site the way it should be designed. if your site has value, it will still be found by hook or by crook.
as i've said before, it ain't rocket science. they just want you to think it is. because otherwise you would have to conclude that it's broken.
one cat that i know of has about 10 real vendors in it. i've watched it move from about 1.8 million results to 8 million results in the past 6 months for a 3 word search. at one point the three words in quotes actually claimed to have 50% more results than the unquoted search of the same words. huh? that ain't the math i learned. this oddity was consistent for about 3 months pre-allegra.