Piet59 - 7:56 am on Nov 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

tedster wrote:

IMO, you were given a gift, and I'll bet there are people reading this thread who are envious. Very few penalized webmasters have had such an advantage, especially not with a specific example provided. Your site is your business and obviously you can do as you please -- but if I got such a message from Google, I promise you that noframes text would have been gone as fast as I could do it. How many of today's web users don't support frames, after all?

To start with: the warning came after a month (there's no real difference between -180 and not being in the index at all).

And we were kicked out of the index half a day later, though we changed the page and filed a reinclusion request within hours.

Googles Webmaster Help Center says:

please read "Search Engines and Frames" at [searchenginewatch.com...] This document describes the use of the "NoFrames" tag to provide alternate content.

According to their own information Google doesn't see alternate text as hidden text. So we guessed we had to read the warning as: we don't like the concept of noframes as a general site description plus sitemap and changed it into an exact copy of our default page.

But it's still guess work and kicking you out of the index and making you guess what the exact reason is, is far less than we expect from a business partner. And yes, as we spend 150 k a year on adwords we consider Google a business partner. And we expect another level of communications from our business partners.