Hugene - 4:33 pm on Dec 22, 2010 (gmt 0)
I must say that this initiative by Google is a very good one. I really don't understand the whole talk of "providing clearly negative comments on a site": how is that wrong? This is exactly the idea, to warn users that a site might compromise the system.
And I am saying this from two points of view :
(1) as a webmaster, if my site was hacked I want to know immediately and not wonder about why I am gone from the listings or have -950, that just creates confusion.
(2) as a user, I am tired of re-installing Windowses on about 10 different machines around me because they've gotten compromised.
Have you even looked at the service and the "safe Browsing diagnostics page"? It is genius, it tells you exactly what threat to look for. As an independent webmaster, I would have never discovered some of these threats.
However, I do agree that this solution of flagging sites can not be the only action taken. And from what I read here it probably isn't.
I think that G should do a combination of all we say here:
1) Immediately inform website through all available communication channels (Analytics, WMT, whois entries, hosting info, emails retrieved on the site...)
2) After informing, wait a few days. If no action, then flag site in SERPS.
3) After flagging site in SERPS, if still no action for a longer time, apply -YYY penalty. Keep flag in SERPS and advise through all channels why penality was applied.
4) After even longer time (like a year maybe), if site is still compromised, remove all together from SERPS and again advise through all channels.
That's got to be a good compromise, protecting both users and webmasters.