Whitey - 7:20 am on Oct 3, 2011 (gmt 0)

Shatner :

I made some improvements after Feb 27, but stopped at the end of April. And made no further improvements since then. I recovered in June, and then was re-pandalized last week. So I don't really think that's a factor.

I think the fact you did nothing is a major factor. You broke the threshold, time went by and you did nothing and slipped below the threshold. You waited to see if it worked and did nothing more. That's the problem.

And i suspect others that rose and fell in a hole also did nothing major since they broke Panda the first time .... but let's see what testimony turns up to challenge that.

btw - i'm sure there's false positives going on as well - this is probably a big work in progress by Google. I wish they'd break their silence and understand folks and families are hurting out there that needn't - giving them half a lead with vague directins appears as if if it's a game. It's not a good corporate look - secret or no business secret. Better guidelines are requried. Folks don't understand and they seem to know that - so why tell them half the truth knowing the implications of it's actions and the levels of many webmaster's dependency. It's not a game for many - it's their means to live.

My best big site with a lot of good content got pandalized.

chrisv1963 - Let's have some numbers , nobody will have a clue unless we get an idea of the URL / content ratios. What is the number of quality pages versus total pages that are good quality ? Approximately, what's the quantity of quality content on each of those pages? Have you really done enough to signal to Google your entire site is entirely one of quality?

It would really help if those contributing to the discussions were a bit tighter on facts, since we can't see the sites concerned, otherwise it's just a useless stab in the dark. We need more precision to have a sensible analysis. ( btw - thanks for sharing chrisv1963 - we need more like you )

Lenny2- So you didn't recover. Most folks ( on very few reports - so few are willing to share for the benefit of others ) that got out are talking major surgery to content / URL ratios , blocking pages with high bounce rates etc etc - doesn't look like you put a focus on that.

To the best of my knowledge , links are not a part of this - except "potentially" in the context of earlier posts in this thread, where you assist users to source alternate quality content sources.

Can you confirm my understanding of your situation ?

More folks need to share with specifics ( including Google ) , otherwise the learning and quality improvements will not happen and a lot of folks will go out of business. Some will enjoy that, but it's a better world when you commune decently for common benefits and trade ideas.

It shames me to see so many webmasters without a clue over nearly 8 months , accepting their fate like lambs to the slaughter. Why accept it, moan and groan - really, you deserve the best and you deserve success and Google needs to respect that to.

[edited by: Whitey at 8:09 am (utc) on Oct 3, 2011]