| 8:47 pm on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I'm also seeing this redirect thing, and I'm sure by now that Google knows they've taken a step backwards. I've got to assume it will go away with an upcoming data push.
| 9:38 pm on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes seeing this also. Additionally, seeing more spam and less relevant results the past few weeks.
| 11:10 pm on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
we're seeing old (cache dates jan-apr 2006)supplemental results show up as the primary search result, and then, it's often listed with a secondary / related (indented from main result) being the correct ( intended / 301 target) url with the most recent cache date (within last 30 days).
One would think you'd get the most recent result and the 301 target as the first and if there were a secondary result, it would be the supplemental?
| 11:27 pm on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The source domain for almost any cross-domain redirect shouldn't be in the SERPs at all. It looked like they were getting this right in recent times, and now it's going backwards. That's why I feel this must be just a temporary bobbling of some kind.
| 11:35 pm on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Google seems to have fallen apart yet again. I would guess the ancient redirects are just one sign. Another is "showing results 1 ot 37 of about 55", then clicking omitted results and magically 96 pages are shown. Another is the weird appearence of new supplementals for URLs that continue to be correctly/currently indexed.
Google has been an inept search engine for some time, so new bits of lameness are just par for the course.
| 12:10 am on Dec 10, 2006 (gmt 0)|
True, but now I see the redirects are gone for what I'm searching for, this gives me hope that you are right, Tedster.