| 8:37 pm on Dec 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Its a funy thing, I thought the game was over since al my sites disapeared from the serps last may. Until November I was working on them a lot but seeing no results I started moving in other directions. And now all twelve sites are back in the serps again.
Its a good wakeup call and allthough my web future looks good now depending on G as a business is just to shaky.
| 8:56 pm on Dec 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
<How could a site go from being 100% relevant to 0% relevant?>
Then back again to 100% relevant. That's what I find so funny when people argue relevance and the spam issue.
Interestingly Google's obsession with spam is toppling many a clean site. Witmess the growth of forum posts in regard to this. Google canít target the spam issue without damaging sites that optimize for particular areas they do business in. Once you attack the optimization techniques of a particular business area the replacements tend to be loosely themed sites optimizing for the money keywords and multiple categories.
| 9:38 pm on Dec 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Many thanks for your kind words guys, they're much appreciated. For my part I'm not at all sad to see the back of this industry ... just looking forward to the future and feeling quite excited for what it may hold.
I understand your point fully, as I have heard it many times on this forum. My main arguement with your point is that I built my company up from nothing, eventually employing around a dozen people (on & off). 5 years of google sending me visitors, the main body of which were after free information, led me to have to employ these people in order to deal with emails, texts and the never ending nuisance calls that come when you have a web based company listed on top of google ... We didn't complain or turn these enquiries away. We felt it our duty to help make the google experience pleasurable. 6 months ago the hits stopped over night and after 2 months I had to lay off several good friends. We didn't spam, nor go in for mutual linking or paid links. Everyone said we would be in the sandbox for a minimum of 9 months because we must have upset googlebot in some way or other. Well, today googlebot forgave us ... let us back at full strength and I'm still none the wiser as to what happened.
As Dayo said, there are a lot of companies in trouble because of this. Small companies, without the resources to make swift changes to find hits from elsewhere. My sympathies lie with them.
So, to your point about business being about taking risks ... maybe Google should be different. The friends that I laid off spent a great deal of unprofitable time dealing with people who got lost on Google and needed the human touch to send them on their way happy.
Well now it's up to someone else to add the human touch to the Net and I somehow doubt they'll get it from you Gimp ;-)
To All Best Wishes ... I choose today to stop playing google games
| 9:48 pm on Dec 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Wow harsh. I am working on my site (batch processing) and peeking at this site while it renders. And I come to this site instead of reading the WSJ. Anyway, all webmasters have for traffic generation is mass media, organic results or paid search. We have a right to be concerned with what the 800 pound gorilla does.
Looking at the test datacenter results is akin to looking into a crystal ball on the future, whether we like the results or not. All we can do is work our site, pray to Google, and optimize within the current guidelines, which we attempt to inquire about here.
| 9:53 pm on Dec 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I highly agree with reseller on mozilla googlebot being a spam detective. Question is, what does trigger it?
| 11:17 pm on Dec 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>I highly agree with reseller on mozilla googlebot being a spam detective
I've been in this camp for quite some time too. Matt says its just a new generation bot, but it's been around for quite some time now. If it was the "bot of the future," then why doesn't plain vanilla Googlebot disappear.
I suspect Mozilla Googlebot uses more resources to gather information, thereby being less efficient than the standard. So the question would be - Why do some sites get more visits from this pest than others? One logical answer is they reserve this bot for sites that are suspecious for some reason.
So far this month, I've had 2,440 visits from Googlbot/2.1 and 2,120 visits from Mozilla Googlebot. A very active month for either / both bots. My site is definately suffering from some kind of penalty. Hopefully, Moz Googlebot is giving me a good report.
| 12:53 am on Dec 31, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Matt says its just a new generation bot |
With all due respect to matt, I cannot take informations from google employees for guaranted. Besides, they will never disclose that it's an anti-spam bot detective. Who know.. maybe banning this bot can always remove sites penalties.
|My site is definately suffering from some kind of penalty. |
I have many sites. The case has been always like this. A deep crawl of mozilla googlebot results in a next day penalty. My sites are of PR7 that's why they go quickly spidered either ways (spidering results in a wealth of google traffic, and spidering that results in a penalty or even worth a ban).
I don't know really what triggers a penalty. A search using site:sitename.com results in millions of pages of which none are under supplementary results.
| 1:43 am on Dec 31, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>Google canít target the spam issue without damaging sites that optimize for particular areas they do business in.<<
I've said it before in a few different places - the most effective method for Google to get rid of spam is to require a unique Adsense ID for each unique domain.
This would clear the field of cookie cutter sites pretty quick, and lessen Google's own workload on algo changes to combat spam. Real sites would have less trouble as a result.
Of course, this way Google would be taking money out of its own pocket through lost AdSense revenue. We can't have that, can we?
I realise that some contributors here have multiple sites and presumably use AdSense to earn revenue. Nothing personal folks, but real sites are more important than something designed specifically for AdSense.
(I'd consider real sites to be those of businesses selling stuff (not affiliates) and content sites with actual original content.)
| 2:44 am on Dec 31, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Mind explaining to a back woods critter how:
"I've said it before in a few different places - the most effective method for Google to get rid of spam is to require a unique Adsense ID for each unique domain."
is any more unique than domain1:adsenseid and domain2:adsenseid which is in essense what is availible now.
Or even better, how it would stop spam?
Are you saying they should review all Adsense sites on a regular basis?
| 2:54 am on Dec 31, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|I've said it before in a few different places - the most effective method for Google to get rid of spam is to require a unique Adsense ID for each unique domain. |
How would that solve anything? Instead of launching a new 1,000,000-page junk site at buds-new-site.com, Bud could just publish his 1,000,000 junk pages at buds-existing-approved-site.com.
| 3:43 am on Dec 31, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Some interesting points are being made here, but we are wandering all over the map and have strayed far from the thread's topic. So this thread is done -- but please, do bring up the independent topics in their own threads.
| This 251 message thread spans 9 pages: < < 251 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  ) |