homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.204.215.209
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Website
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 819 message thread spans 28 pages: < < 819 ( 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ... 28 > >     
Google Update Bourbon Part 4
GoogleGuy




msg:736898
 12:02 am on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Continued from part 3 here: [webmasterworld.com...]


I did the rounds to check on the state of various data updates. I'd estimate that the "0.5" (not algorithmic changes, but rather responses to various spam/porn complaints + processing reinclusion requests) should go out this weekend sometime or possibly Monday. There should be a binary push this week to improve a corner-case of CJK-related search, and that new binary should have the hooks to turn on the third set of data. Regarding finishing up the second piece of data, there's still two data centers with older data. Those data centers will probably be switched over by Monday. By Monday, 2.5 of the 3.5 things will probably be on.

 

fearlessrick




msg:737288
 1:05 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)


[72.14.207.104...] looks good in general. But my sites are still gone and still much spam. However backlinks are updated.

Yeah, that's just fine. For my four word phrase, all four words appearing in the title and body of a key page on my site, a very unique string, I've gone from 72 to 86 to 94 to now 113. Very encouraging. My page rates #1 and #2 on Yahoo and MSN for the same search.

Let's face facts, people. Google is broken, they've nearly admitted to using HUMANS (OMG!) to fix or tweak the broken algo, GG already said that spam reports and reinclusion requests were being handled through Monday (done by humans), and they're not really going to tell us that their system is warped, now are they?

Don't you think an admission of guilt on their part would cause a 40% drop in the share price of their stock? And don't you think that they are now ruled by the desire of shareholders (they have a fiduciary reponsibility to them which supercedes all moral and ethical precepts) to increase the value of the stock?

Sorry to say, but anyone who thinks that Google is anything but a broken company with many, many problems which they refuse to discuss, is simply living in a rose-colored world.

And if the mods think this post is off-topic, let me remind them that I am talking here about the Bourbon update and its implications.

It's time to forego results from Google and look elsewhere toward a more stable, transparent and functioning platform.

OUT.

reseller




msg:737289
 1:08 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Here it is!

Please read:

Adding Large Amount of Content
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]

cat5




msg:737290
 1:13 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

"After all the big brothers have nothing to win if there is no a consumption society out there due the lack of money,(ie who is gone to book a hotel on line or a holiday if he does not have money for fish and chips). "

I agree to that.

fearlessrick




msg:737291
 1:26 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

reseller, thanks for those links. I did a quick ead of the threads and if Google is penalizing sites for adding content - which I did, but to no large degree during the last update, maybe 100 pages - then I say, to hell with them.

I can add at least 20 pages of relevant, useful content a day (I have done a great deal of research and storing in my niche and the data is already on my computer), plus add 5 to six snippets of information to existing pages. If Goofle thinks this is somehow bad, then I have no use for their services as a reliable search engine.

I may stand alone on this, but I'm not about to have how I operate my business dictated to me by a nameless, faceless corporate monstrosity, that, by most indications, isn't even functioning properly. There are other SEs and other ways to market, advertise and promote your site.

Johan007




msg:737292
 1:28 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks Reseller!

I had added 60,000 page shop and this could have "Sandboxed" the site....There are still so many variables why my site could go down... I have done nothing wrong so I think it could be Sandbox.

Kangol




msg:737293
 1:42 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Shouldn't something happened this week? I understood that the update is not totally over. I do not see any changes, I see lots of blog spam coming out of sandbox on my terms. I am sorry to say but there in not a real improvement on the terms I watch.

When Bourbon started on some DCs Ive saw good results, the results started to disappears and now are replaced with the lowest kind of blog spam and redirects. I was expecting more with the way Bourbon started.

confused ellie




msg:737294
 1:51 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks reseller. :) I am wondering now if that is really what has happened to us.

Thanks for those links, very interesting.

Ellie :)

danny




msg:737295
 1:52 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

With GoogleGuy soliciting spam reports and putting in reinclusion requests, and with eval.google.com, my guess is that Google is using some kind of neural network to detect spam - they need feedback to help train it.

An interesting consequence of this is that it's quite possible that no one at Google, even the search algorithm specialists, would be able to come up with any specific reason for the penalties afflicting obviously clean sites. So it's hardly surprising if we're beating around the bush cluelessly!

Here's hoping the network is retrained so it can tell what any human would be able to see in under a minute - that my site is totally kosher!

Atticus




msg:737296
 2:03 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Isn't it about time for Captain Kirk to beam down, confront the Google computer and through an argument of relentless logic cause it to spectaculary blow itself to bits?

kelleybelly




msg:737297
 2:23 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

My website was lossed at least 20 2 word phrases with this last update. The irony is Yesturday we did more sales then ever, so I am not that upset about it. However when seeing what I have been replaced with it makes me sick, several redirects, and affiliate sites in the furniture industry. Normally 33% of my tracffic is from Google. The last Two days only 26% has been from Google, still quite a large portion, but it really makes you feel like you are at there Mercy. Although My sales have not been effected by ths update as of yet, I think that the search quality of Google has really gone down hill and it is time for everyone to start to look for alternative search engines for your own searches and to promote your websites. I do have to say though that Google search is still better then Yahoo, but it is just a matter of time since Google has left itself wide open for another Search Engine to blow Google out of the water with some Great search results.

luckychucky




msg:737298
 2:29 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

I finally read through to the end of this thread...My overarching impression is that everyone is scratching his/her head wondering what the hell is happening in Bourbon, and why.

There's always some confusion like this, but Bourbon feels different. Maybe it's just me, but having been thru a couple of other updates before, it's striking just how clueless all the brilliant (and other) collective minds here seem to be. Usually after a short while comparing observations and theories, the WebmasterWorld threads start figuring out the specifics. A bible's worth of postings later, and generally speaking we're all still grasping at straws.

If over at Googleplex they're excited to read this thread, thrilled to see they've really stumped us all, really got us confused, then that's a problem. If their mission is to mess up the SEOs, because lately they're starting to view things as an Us vs. Them scenario, they've done remarkably well. It's also Google's self-sabotage. Maybe I'd even go so far as to call it suicidal.

The most relevant on-topic site which honestly and innocently posts its offerings is not even going to exist in Google. Google needs SEO as the very blood in its veins. The point is that if G is trying to make SEO a cryptic, indecipherable, frustrating experience without rhyme or reason, their relevance, usefulness and market share is going to suffer. Never forget how much is at stake here, and how much money there is to be made by grabbing from Google's market share, in a hypercompetitive global economy.

I sure hope there's a budding new genius geek (or geek collective) out there brewing a paradigm-shifting new search algo. And I sure hope it's open source too. It's happened before - look at the American automobile industry's former dominance, now usurped by Asian imports...Case in point: what's FireFox market share now - 30 percent already?

And here's a few quotes I liked, exracted from previous posts:

(max_mm wrote:) Google as well as other search engine should provide a utility enabling you to quickly identify if your site was penalized and the likely reasons for this penalty. I don't think anyone really want them to revel all. BUT if they did penalize your site they should explain why! and not send you guessing for the next 3-6 months {...} What many of us want is a timely explanations and appropriate mechanism to resolve such burning issues.

(Atticus wrote:) No need for government intervention. Adam Smith's invisible hand will drop G in the trash can if they deserve it. I for one no longer use G as my primary SE. I believe that G will continue to lose market share if they continue down the road they are on. Disagree? Fine. Whatever.

(Atticus wrote:) If folks want to have a serious update thread, I say, go for it {...} Somebody suggested that Brett set up a form to poll users on various info about their situation {..} This would be the way to go, because not only would it gather relevant data in an unemotional way, but it would also include industry and keyword data that we are barred from including in our posts.

kelleybelly




msg:737299
 2:42 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

I believe Googles latest search results are so off target that, it is causing my conversion rate for adwords to go up. Historically, I have done better with organic results but in the lsat few days I have had a higher conversion rate then evener for my ad camoagin, I attribute it to the off topic search results Google has provided is forcing at least my market to really dig through all of the ads. Just another way for Google to make more money, but it is going to backfire on them. Sure I was thrilled to see my conversion rates for the first time be as high as they were but you are right there is no rhyme or reason for the new algo changes that I can see anyway. Can it be possible that they are doing this to generate more money with there adwords by providing irrelevent natural results?

helleborine




msg:737300
 2:47 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

I for one don't buy into the conspiracy theories at all.

Google wants to continue being Joe Surfer's first choice of search engine by giving him the best results possible.

In all likelihood, Google has made a colossal mistake somewhere along the way, or is pathologically vulnerable to certain factors that cause sites to become non-existent, for all pratical intents, in the SERPs.

johnhh




msg:737301
 2:53 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

" Can it be possible that they are doing this to generate more money with there adwords by providing irrelevent natural results? "

I don't think so as if the results of our research today is true they won't have many users left!

We did quite a few checks on yahoo and excite today, where we are strong we are ranked high, where we are weak we are ranked low - fair enough no problem with that. All the ones above us had good content.

The same searches in Google ends up with rubbish to be honest.

reseller




msg:737302
 2:54 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

luckychucky

>If over at Googleplex they're excited to read this thread, thrilled to see they've really stumped us all, really got us confused, then that's a problem. If their mission is to mess up the SEOs, because lately they're starting to view things as an Us vs. Them scenario, they've done remarkably well. It's also Google's self-sabotage. Maybe I'd even go so far as to call it suicidal.<

Great post!

And I wrote something in the same direction already last March.

msg #286 , March 30 2005
[webmasterworld.com...]

msg #306 , March 30 2005
[webmasterworld.com...]

msg #352, April 3 2005
[webmasterworld.com...]

masg #7, May 10 2005
[webmasterworld.com...]

Enjoy ;-)

europeforvisitors




msg:737303
 2:55 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Let's face facts, people. Google is broken, they've nearly admitted to using HUMANS (OMG!) to fix or tweak the broken algo, GG already said that spam reports and reinclusion requests were being handled through Monday (done by humans), and they're not really going to tell us that their system is warped, now are they?

What's the big deal about using humans? Algorithms just do the drudge work--it takes people to set the goals, define the parameters, and (as danny suggested) train the neural network or "black box" or whatever Google may using these days. For that matter, the Google Directory has always been edited by humans (the editors of DMOZ), and PageRank is a formula based on human opinions as expressed through linking. If you're going to assert that Google is "broken," you'll need better evidence than the fact that humans are giving input to the robots on the assembly line.

Clint




msg:737304
 2:55 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Clint, i know we have things bad but there are many terrible things happing every second in the world, google wiping our sites is bad but not in comparison to others. Don't be bitter you doing the right thing researching on here and i am positive you'll bounce back.
<snip>
I do agree that results are poor and certainly not an improvement and yes i would say that if if was doing really well.

I have to say that's true. It's certainly worth mentioning to all to gain some perspective: About two weeks ago my neighbor's son committed suicide. About two weeks ago my best "email friend" whom I've known about 8 years, fell off the riding lawn-mower and was chewed-up so bad he's still in the ICU (hundreds & hundreds of stitches, exposed ribs). He also may lose his arm and still has to be given several units of blood daily. He's in my line of work which is VERY "hand-dependant", without a hand goes his business. Yeah, this may be OT, but I think it's a "priority check" many of use can certainly use. Thank God that all of us can at least still "complain" and try to find some answers here.

kelleybelly




msg:737305
 3:00 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

I don't beleve Google is broken due to humans at all, Although it the same Humans that do the DMOZ directly are tweaking Google then we are in serious trouble.

Nevertheless, Wether or not Google is Broken or they want it to be like this, their search results are going down the tubles. Forget our own websites for a second and our individual industries. I can't even get good search results when trying to book a hotel room at a certain place or information about real estate that is not spam or anything just for my own personal use. We are no sitting here typing and whining soley because of our rankings. Clearly we have lossed what was once considered probably the best place to gather information on the internet.

luckychucky




msg:737306
 3:04 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

One more thing:
Why does Google dominate?
You could say it's because of the massive data-crunching firepower in its datacenters. Goog has the biggest engine out there, therefore they're the only ones who can truly ingest and digest the Net.
Well, that playing field is going to even out. Soon we'll have nanotech computers (it's no pipe dream, either) - molecular circuits moving photons rather than electrons. The computational firepower of a few desktops will fit on the head of a pin and cost a song.

What's left? An algorithm. Compete against the PhD brainpool with an open source brainpool, and watch what happens.

Anything else? You're only left with a brand name and an inflated stock valuation...

fearlessrick




msg:737307
 3:07 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

EFV, while your post is not worth public comment, I did try to stickymail you and got this:

status: Error: europeforvisitors member StickyMail box full.
PREVIEW Mode : Message NOT sent. Continue editing.
Press the send message submit button to finalize and send to the recipient(s).

walkman




msg:737308
 3:13 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

one site of mine still doesn't come up for "domain.com" (100+ place), and I think it has sandboxed, either manually or by the algo for a set time. Why? Because I have chased people around to remove the ROS links (from 2 sites), and I have totally changed the content. It's a new cms style (custom made from scratch), all existing pages were deleted, and here I've put at least 4-5 times more content....two months ago.

The content is added manually, nothing is automated (when it comes to adding), and there's no chance of chance of having dupes since I've closed all the loopholes. There's no way a sober student would mark those pages as spam or as "thin affiliates".
All pages are indexed and they have been indexed at least 3-4 times since I have changed it. Now I'm forced to update some ugly site becuase that is making me some money. I'd rather stick with this, but Google disagrees ;)

Clint




msg:737309
 3:24 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

I'd really appreciate it if someone can comment on this. I found a webpage that's for checking G backlinks and PR updates. My PR is the same, but it's only showing TWENTY (20) backlinks! So, are these "backlinks" those which link TO you? If so, this is so far off target it's pathetic.

When I do a site:mydomain.com at G, about 75 PERCENT of the hits are GONE! This is compared to about two days ago! I DID do the 301 redirect with non and www URL versions. Is this why?
Thanks.

walkman




msg:737310
 3:29 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Clint,
google doesn't show all backlinks. Use Yahoo instead

Dayo_UK




msg:737311
 3:32 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Clint the 301 is more of a long term solution/fix to a problem you may have.

I would not think that would have made such an impact in such a short time.

Clint




msg:737312
 3:41 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ok thanks, so what's the Yahoo "command" for backlinks please? I used a TOOL on a webpage to get them, so I would think it's accurate. Search for "datacenter quick check" and you should find the webpage.
Thanks.

Clint




msg:737313
 3:43 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

(delete)

[edited by: Clint at 3:44 pm (utc) on June 7, 2005]

walkman




msg:737314
 3:43 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)


link:http://www.your-domain.com

Clint




msg:737315
 3:46 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Walkman, thanks. Ok in Y I'm showing about 4.5 times more than in G. But it's still low.

EDIT: Now in Y when I remove the www: link:http://mydomain.com it's showing the correct amount!

Clint




msg:737316
 3:50 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

That doesn't make sense because in both Y and G they indexed my www pages for search results! Of course in G, they no longer exist, but still in Y and all the hits are the www prefix. I'm really confused.

europeforvisitors




msg:737317
 3:54 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

EFV, while your post is not worth public comment, I did try to stickymail you and got this: status: Error: europeforvisitors member StickyMail box full.

While deleting some old messages from my stickymail folder just now, I ran across a message from last year that told me about Google's evaluation program. The program was well established at that time, apparently. So, while certain aspects of Google's ranking and filtering processes may indeed be "broken," the idea that human evaluation and input are proof that Google has suddenly adopted a Band-Aid approach is contradicted by the evidence.

walkman




msg:737318
 3:56 pm on Jun 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

I guess that's why they suggested you do the 301, your PR /Links are being divided in two (not to mention a dupe penalty).

>>EDIT: Now in Y when I remove the www: link:http://mydomain.com it's showing the correct amount"

This 819 message thread spans 28 pages: < < 819 ( 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ... 28 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
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