pageoneresults - 6:56 pm on Jun 21, 2008 (gmt 0)

Ya know, its so cool that the two of you injected some life into this topic, thank you very much. Kudos to the WebmasterWorld Admins and Mods, ya'll do a bang up job!

I think this is the essence of the matter: you have to protect your site. No-one else (including Google) is going to do it for you.

There is an inherent flaw with that statement. Many site owners don't know how to protect themselves. Many application developers are releasing platforms that are open for these types of exploits. Put the two together and its a disaster waiting to happen. Mind you, the percentages are small, but I think if you look at the effect those small percentages are having on the targeted domains, the numbers are huge, in the Billions!

I think we could class most sabotage attempts as Search Engine Denial of Service (SEDOS, catchy, huh?): crowd out, or push down the opposition.

DUDE! That is an awesome Acronym for this particular discussion. In fact, I'm going to quote you and give credit to you when I use that. SEDOS < How brilliant is that? ;) First thing I thought of were my times on a SEA*DOO when they first came out. That was years ago! I know, it should be pronounced CDAS.

The wording of (and edits to) Google's guidelines have always been a subject of interest to me. The recent change: Google are getting a lot of emails from people worried about who links to them.

Me too although I don't follow them as much as I used to except instances such as this. Then I'll read them from start to finish and make sure that I match all the conflicting statements "from my perspective" that is.