aristotle
msg:4506893 | 12:11 pm on Oct 11, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Is there any proof of this?
|
|
textex -- I meant it to be a theory or hypothesis. That's why i used the word "could". It's an attempt to explain the reports of people who removed backlinks but haven't seen any indications of a recovery.
|
textex
msg:4506898 | 12:38 pm on Oct 11, 2012 (gmt 0) |
I understand. I think google is not just going to release sites once the link profile is cleaned up. I think they want to see the site to continue to establish authority in its niche. That's just wishful thinking.
|
Jez123
msg:4506902 | 12:55 pm on Oct 11, 2012 (gmt 0) |
I have a site linking / was linking to me that is sitewide, using just about every anchor text that could pertain to my site. I have a feeling that the links are being added then removed, added then removed. Though I can't see any now and none are cached as far as I can tell. I suspect someone negatively SEOing my domain. Either that or google WMT is showing me very old data that it was not showing a month ago.
|
BaseballGuy
msg:4506981 | 4:58 pm on Oct 11, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Speaking of "neg SEO", I'm doing rep management for a client. One of his customers bad-mouthed his business and it was on a pretty powerful PR5 website.
I blasted it for 3 months straight and it went from position #1 to the top of page 4.
"Blasted" meaning doing what's generally considered "negative SEO" in this day and age, with one or two "twists".
Penguin has been a god-send for negative SEO, for both people like me who use it for good purposes (by helping clients clean up negative press/etc that Google artificially ranks high due to certain keywords being on the site, such as: fraud, scam, lawsuit, etc), and those who use it for bad purposes.
|
joost
msg:4507035 | 7:30 pm on Oct 11, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Great!
Google does not officially deny the existence of negative SEO anymore:
[webmasterworld.com ]
A new market is born:
@financialhost:
| Lot's of SEO's are reporting requests to spam competitors - Google's spam team have lost touch on reality. |
|
And it works:
@BaseballGuy:
| I blasted it for 3 months straight and it went from position #1 to the top of page 4. |
|
So, did you make a mistake and you got punished by Allmighty G? No problem: if you now rank #40, just blast #1-39 and you're back on top!
|
Jez123
msg:4507330 | 12:30 pm on Oct 12, 2012 (gmt 0) |
@ baseballguy. Am I right in guessing that adding then removing then adding and removing links would probably do the trick? As I said, it's not like it was just one anchor either it was all of them. Must have raised a massive flag with google.
|
webseos
msg:4507688 | 3:58 am on Oct 13, 2012 (gmt 0) |
What is this penguin data refresh. We saw Penguin Updates in May 2012. May be later updated. But what is DATA refresh
|
tedster
msg:4507696 | 4:28 am on Oct 13, 2012 (gmt 0) |
A Data Refresh runs the same algorithm over new website crawl data and re-scores the sites. An Update is a change to the algorithm itself.
|
smallcompany
msg:4507706 | 5:43 am on Oct 13, 2012 (gmt 0) |
It makes me wonder why a site would be hit on October 5 if it was not on previous two runs. The change in link profile was to let some blog post linking go away (mostly same keyword).
|
Splugged
msg:4507708 | 7:44 am on Oct 13, 2012 (gmt 0) |
@joost
I think it's only logical. Logical.
An algorithm is simply logic, made up of mathematical calculations, percentages, etc ... And Google is an algorithm. Advanced but still an algorithm. Not a single algorithm in the world is able to determine who has placed a link on a website. Until now, they were just lying.
|
sunnyujjawal
msg:4507718 | 10:03 am on Oct 13, 2012 (gmt 0) |
no major change as all were accepting from Matt...Jarring & Jolting is still in his pocket
|
seoskunk
msg:4508235 | 7:23 pm on Oct 15, 2012 (gmt 0) |
I was one of the 0.3 affected. I wonder is it best just to start another website or to fight on?
|
| This 132 message thread spans 5 pages: < < 132 ( 1 2 3 4 [5] ) |
|
|
