StupidScript - 1:14 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

Yes, I see what you are saying, and I understand the "trick": You put the "noindex" instruction on YOUR page, not the offender's page. G looks at your page via the redirect page ... and removes the redirect page only? But ... YOUR page is the one with the "noindex" on it.

The 302 is resolving to YOUR page, hence either G has the 302 page AS BEING your page or it doesn't. In either case, the site is NOT within a domain you are authorized to manage, and G doesn't ask you for any authorization ... does it?

In the latter case, G sees BOTH pages ... and you are authorized to manage only YOUR page. In the former case, G sees only the 302 page ... which you are not authorized to manage.

How can G remove a page at your request when you are not authorized to manage that domain? Are we in agreement that G is too stupid to realize what it has indexed and who is asking it to take a page out of that index?

The "trick" described above only works if G does not validate authorization to manage the offending page's domain. If they go ahead and remove a page from someone else's domain from their index because you ask them to, that just doesn't sound right.

The ends do not justify the means, and this leaves a lot of issues on the table ... issues far more serious than what the 302 perpetrator did in the first place.

IMHO.