texasville
msg:768512 | 1:22 am on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
The only thing I have seen is my pr has rolled back to what it was before the last update. It remains the same in google directory tho so I assume this is an aberration.
|
netscan
msg:768513 | 1:28 am on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Been bouncin' around all week for me
|
walkman
msg:768514 | 3:12 am on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
some DCs still have the "old" one apparently. I hope it's the new one though as my PR dropped last tiem G changed things.
|
Wizard
msg:768515 | 5:57 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I see no dancing at all for a few of my sites I checked. I wish there were an update, I'd like to see the results of some new backlinks I acquired!
|
andrea99
msg:768516 | 6:18 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
PR and traffic steady and stable here.
|
Dayo_UK
msg:768517 | 6:20 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I think it is old PR coming and going. I would like to see a PR update when all the 301s, 302s and Canonicals are sorted out - so I guess we have to wait until "Big Daddy" has rolled out and finished. So next PR update might not be for a couple of months if MC is talking about "Big Daddy" taking a couple of months to roll out.
|
texasville
msg:768518 | 9:17 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
One of my sites has had two different pr rankings just today. Changed back and forth between old and most recent 30 times in last two weeks.
|
RunnerD
msg:768519 | 9:27 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Shoot. I was hoping it was new pr. Went from 5 to 6. However were a 6 before jagger, so i am assuming this is just showing old pr for some reason.
|
robzilla
msg:768520 | 9:33 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I don't recall Matt Cutts' blog having a PR7..
|
walkman
msg:768521 | 9:37 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
>> I don't recall Matt Cutts' blog having a PR7.. I do
|
jdancing
msg:768522 | 9:48 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Q - What is the PR of Matt Cutts' blog? A - Whatever he wants it to be.
|
cornwall
msg:768523 | 9:57 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| What is the PR of Matt Cutts' blog? |
|
Does it really matter what the PR is, as the Google representitive, you will want to read it anyway.
|
leeky
msg:768524 | 10:05 pm on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
My PR hasnt moved, but as of this morning my site has moved back 4 pages for every keyword ive checked. Merry xmas to you too Google, yet another site down the drain :-(
|
Lorymer
msg:768525 | 9:56 am on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0) |
2 of my sites went from PR5 to PR0 and then PR came back for both of them just after a few hours
|
Pico_Train
msg:768526 | 10:20 am on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Back and forth between 5 and 6. 5 being the old PR before the most recent update. I agree with Dayo_UK on the old pr coming and going on DCs. PR is boring now anyway.
|
Wizard
msg:768527 | 4:28 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Now I see the dance on one of my sites. Still checking whether the change is forward or backward. Added: I checked and I'm sure it dances to the older PR from before last toolbar update.
|
crobb305
msg:768528 | 7:31 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Matt's PR has been PR7 since Jaggar 1 back in October. Also, he is pretty good about keeping us posted on pending/upcoming PageRank updates and I have seen nothing mentioned as of yet. I see his blog pr is showing pr0 at this moment, but I have seen it bounce back and forth from 7 to 0 since Jaggar 1 depending on the datacenter being accessed. C
|
ronburk
msg:768529 | 10:24 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| Does it really matter what the PR is, as the Google representitive, you will want to read it anyway. |
|
Sure it does. Ya need to know whether it's worth your time to try to spam it for a backlink.
|
Rick_M
msg:768530 | 1:37 am on Dec 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
<off-topic> Of course, spamming it because of a high pagerank is still worthless. He uses the nofollow attribute - page rank isn't passed from Matt Cutt's blog comments. </off-topic>
|
followgreg
msg:768531 | 10:00 am on Dec 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
It's actually funny to see these guys posting message on MC blog not having a clue about the nofollow element :)
It comes standard with wordpress guys! Hey...and yes it is just a roll back of old PR...nothing to talk about really..
|
|
