homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.254.108
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

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

    
Class-C and Whois
cangoou




msg:3960164
 9:35 am on Jul 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Hello! You always find SEOs hiring different Class-C IPs to make Google believe that links are from different persons. But doesn't Google look at the whois-data as well and not only at the IPs? I mean, you may have links from 100 Class-C-different IPs, but all with the same whois: Isn't that suspicious as well? I'm asking because I know a SEO which does only different IPs and NOT different whois and it seems to work somehow.

 

encyclo




msg:3960492
 7:38 pm on Jul 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Whois data, toolbar data, AdSense and Analytics data, data from ISPs, click-thru patterns... there are a multitide of data points that Google can use to identify networks. Just relying on links from different C-class IP addresses when the other factors haven't been addressed is rarely in itself sufficient to pass under the radar.

dhaliwal




msg:3960790
 6:11 am on Jul 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

i am having websites on different C Class IPs
And also have different Who Is for them. Some of them are even under Private Reg.

But, as we interlink these websites, i am sure, Google can know from linking pattern.

But it helps to some extent.

James_WV




msg:3960887
 8:59 am on Jul 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

If a human can look at it sites and tell they're part of a network (which I usually can and I'm no 'guru'), then I would think Google can too

tedster




msg:3960890
 9:04 am on Jul 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

Yup - and especially if you begin to rank for a good keyword, you should expect to get some human inspection.

dhaliwal




msg:3960924
 10:28 am on Jul 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

@ tedster

you mean human inspection from Google or from competitors ?

CainIV




msg:3961513
 6:05 am on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

"I'm asking because I know a SEO which does only different IPs and NOT different whois and it seems to work somehow."

Not all websites are looked at the same, and not all networks are analyzed the same by Google. But I would say that in the game of risk vs reward, the SEO you know is probably playing more on the side of risk.

Once any of the websites ranks consistently, you might get human inspection from Google and competitors. :)

dhaliwal




msg:3961530
 6:23 am on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

Once any of the websites ranks consistently, you might get human inspection from Google and competitors. :)

From competitors is fine.
From Google, hmmm, are they having time for this.

tedster




msg:3961532
 6:34 am on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

Google and human editorial input [webmasterworld.com]

When it comes to "big" keywords, you bet that they have humans watching and evaluating the SERPs.

AnonyMouse




msg:3961764
 1:56 pm on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

and yet...and yet...my competitor dominates the SERPs for serious keywords, based on a pyramid of themed sites spread across only 4 or 5 servers...by all accounts, this should have been killed off years ago, and yet there he is, defying common SEO wisdom...aarggh

[edited by: tedster at 7:09 pm (utc) on July 29, 2009]

Shaddows




msg:3961809
 2:58 pm on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

Mmm. Tightly focussed sites that are on topic and heavily interlinked looks more like a gaming empire, rather then a gamed system. If its 'above board' (no attempt to hide the interactions), I can't see the problem.

In fact, I would say its more of a problem if Google penalised such situations. A consumer of such services might like to be able to roam between gaming sites, comfortable in the fact they are all run by the same operator, presumably an operator they trust.

Its only when you start sneaky interlinking-for-SEO that the big G should aim their counter-measures at you.

cangoou




msg:3961843
 4:16 pm on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

If Google penalises hidden networks and doesn't penalise obvious networks - why should you try to hide my network then?

Shaddows




msg:3961847
 4:37 pm on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

Exactly. Don't hide networks. Just don't.

Similarly, don't try to give your sites an artificial boost by interlinking. How you balance these two is up to you, but I'd err on the side of "if its good for my user, its good for me".

Golden rule: EVERY LINK YOU HOST, MUST TO TO AN ON-TOPIC SITE- preferably an on-topic page

CainIV




msg:3961905
 5:53 pm on Jul 29, 2009 (gmt 0)

"From competitors is fine. "

not if you have competitors like some of the extremely knowledgeable guys on this board. :)

cangoou




msg:3963018
 8:10 am on Jul 31, 2009 (gmt 0)

Exactly. Don't hide networks. Just don't.

That means if I own 100 domains and think that Domain #101 fits in I could link from all 100 domains to this domain and google would not punish me?

Shaddows




msg:3963037
 9:34 am on Jul 31, 2009 (gmt 0)

That means if I own 100 domains and think that Domain #101 fits in

If GOOGLE thinks it fits, analysis of similar situations suggests you should be fine, but there are caveats.

First amongst them is that each of those sites should enjoy a independant backlink profile, and that Site101 should have links other than from Sites(1-100). Homogenous backlinks look spammy.

Otherwise, if its done above board, you are unlikely to get penalised. The links probably will have less pop than other links, but actual penalties are unlikely.

A "penalty-like occurance" may be evident down the line. That's because the links will likely be fully counted to start with, then the association discovered, links devalued, ranking lowered. Not a penalty- your site is higher than if the links were never there, but lower than if the links were independant. Removing the links hurts the site further. I suspect this phenomena is behind the vast majority of "my site just got penalised" stories we get.

Disclaimer: The above is speculation. It fits with my experience, though I appreciate it is not SEO Orthodoxy. YMMV. Forum advice is no substitute for personal experience.

If in doubt, test

cangoou




msg:3963296
 6:49 pm on Jul 31, 2009 (gmt 0)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

internetheaven




msg:3965537
 5:44 pm on Aug 4, 2009 (gmt 0)

my competitor dominates the SERPs for serious keywords, based on a pyramid of themed sites spread across only 4 or 5 servers

Google.co.uk by any chance? Big thing over here. One guy in the legal industry actually has each site as a different keyword in the navigation panel for each website. A network of 22 domains all with practically identical navigation panels linking to each other.

Amazing! Ranks just under us for most but above us for some. That's impressive considering that it took 3 years and 10,000+ backlinks for us to get to that spot whilst he's just tailored the 22 domains with 100 backlinks to each to cover the same ground as our 1 site.

Manual inspection? Maybe in the US where such things get media attention ... doubt there is a UK inspection team ... our results are the biggest load of spam you've ever seen.

AnonyMouse




msg:3965594
 7:30 pm on Aug 4, 2009 (gmt 0)

Yes, it's country-specific: google.es. He's not the only one, there are a couple more - hands up, we all did the same back in 2002, but now?!? Maybe you're right, and it's the lack of manual review in country-specific SERPs...just a matter of time then ;-)

CainIV




msg:3965604
 7:47 pm on Aug 4, 2009 (gmt 0)

Personal disclaimers on SEO advice. Love it.

fishfinger




msg:3966260
 4:24 pm on Aug 5, 2009 (gmt 0)

doubt there is a UK inspection team ... our results are the biggest load of spam you've ever seen

They certainly are. Obvious (and surprisingly small) networks of 'directories' and 'blogs' being used to get 1st place trade/professional town/city rankings all over the shop.

brotherhood of LAN




msg:3966541
 12:14 am on Aug 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Google.co.uk by any chance

I've saw similar in the UK, where there's a 'main' site with the brand name, and brand-location child domains.

Out of 1100 backlinks shown for the main site, hundred's are the child site, which are on the same class C and obviously the same 'entity' creating the site (a couple of dozen per IP). They rank fairly well too, for a lucrative market. To be fair they're a large company, but on the other hand one site would've been just as practical for users.

From the human POV, it can 'seem' less spammy when it's a well known brand or big industry player.

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.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved