Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Forum Moderators: lawman
<edited to reflect that NickJAllen only had one thread going, I worded it incorrectly, sorry!>
[edited by: pageoneresults at 3:28 pm (utc) on Aug. 22, 2002]
The much feared ro-bot(tom) simply cannot be that sophisticated if it allows the most basic spam through the system.
Not at all. I see the exact opposite. There seems to be an almost equal balance of both criticism and kudos. The criticism is really heavy during and just after the dance. Then things go back to normal and in about 3 weeks, the critics arrive again! ;)
Any thread move/merge/split is done as quickly as possible with the available board tools (which are jaw-droppers by comparison to other board scripts). That said, we're now managing nearly 200 active threads daily -it happens.
As to the pro-this engine or pro-that engine, we just don't do the flame thing. Doesn't matter which member it is, we do not allow personal attacks. Not that you were into that, just that is what can drive that perception. That and the fact we don't do googles spam reporting for them.
SinnerG, we are aware of the situation you talk about. Trying to keep topics consoludated. See other post in a minute in this forum.
We want people to enjoy reading here, and flamming or repetitive adult language is not something most people find enjoyable.
Oh, its not hidden at all. That one thread is probably causing more stress on the board than 4 or 5 pages combined. One of these days Brett will show how many times a thread has been viewed! ;)
You can be assured that your comments are being read by all. Its easier to bookmark one thread than it is to follow 20 or 30 of them relative to the dance.
Please read my original posting - perfectly harmless!
What I *have* done is criticise Google - and this appears to have caused some panic and accusations of flaming!
NickJAllen - Having been one to criticize the board for having too many Google dance threads going, I can understand why your post was added to a thread where the mods felt it would fit.
If you think there is no criticism of Google allowed here, just do a search for PRO - you will find plenty of unhappy posters. I have posted before that the two most common threads here are "Why I love Google" and "Why I hate Google."
I don't think reasonable criticism of Google or any other entity will result in panic - or censorship - here. If stifling discusssion was Brett's goal, he could have killed this thread :)
Just my thoughts.
(here it comes....)
I agree that there is scattered criticism of Google in these pages, but it tends to be individual rather than generic. e.g. woe stories about PR0s and a few technical concerns.
What I am trying to say is that the GoogleBot appears to be doing a very bad job indeed. The justification for this statement is simple - sites full of the most basic and primitive spam are not being penalised, or even detected by GoogleBot. The spam filtering is bad -that's the thesis, and all the evidence is there. Marcia even suggested in a previous post that it was there for "research" reasons - what - all in my search category!
I have never seen a general complaint about this on these pages (except for a previous posting of my own).
And it must be said that when GoogleGuy makes an appearance the tone of the postings becomes uncomfortably reverential - alike to the appearance of the King himself at an Elvis convention! There is an almost embarrassing fawning surrounding his posting - "Hey GoogleGuy, I got a PR zero and my business is finished. I don't know why, and now I can't afford to feed the kids - BUT WE LOVE YA ANYWAY!"
I've got no bad PRs, and the site is doing fine. But it bugs me that this level of respect is given to an engine which is able to overlook blatant spam. And I *still* don't understand why I haven't seen more complaints of this type on these pages.
GG is round my place every other weekend :), when we walk in the dining room and there is no food on the table my kids look at *me* with sad eyes, they don't look at GG.
>And I *still* don't understand why I haven't seen more complaints of this type on these pages.
Our dark and dirty secret is, no whineing.
We also don't get into specific "spam site" issues for member protection. If someone comes in and points out your site as spam, how would you react? We can't know who is narking on who, or who's site is who's. Once we get into that, we are into a huge area of privacy concerns. The only thing we CAN do, is ask members to go to Google and use the reporting system they have in place.
<edit> I dropped a "not" in the 2nd sentence</edit>
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 10:20 pm (utc) on Aug. 22, 2002]
As for the chap who says I should stop using Google: that's a little like suggesting that I stop breathing because I don't like the quality of the atmosphere - an irrational posting.
And the correct spelling is... Whining
Pronunciation Key (hwn, wn)
v. whined, whin·ing, whines v. intr.
1. To utter a plaintive, high-pitched, protracted sound, as in pain, fear, supplication, or complaint.
2. To complain or protest in a childish fashion.
3. To produce a sustained noise of relatively high pitch: jet engines whining.
As to the hidden this and that: it has been explained over and over again that this kind of things mostly do not get caught by any engines, but also is in most cases not what makes the success of sites.
Nope, Google doesn't put a real high priority on old school tricks. Most of them don't work. The only ones that do, all involve linking. Hidden links and such are a problem, but one-two here or there - no problem.
As GG himself said, they don't like to penalize individual sites, they want to address the core problem in the whole system. Once you start ear marking specific sites with a red pen, it's a never ending battle. But, if you find and address a linking problem, it's fixed on everything everywhere and you don't have to revisit the issue again and again with each problem site.
Read what I said in the FAQ on spam (that was from two years ago). Basically the same thing as here.
I think I've made a serious point.
Direct me to those postings on this site which have made *general* complaints about overt spamming consistently overlooked by Google, and also to postings which reveal Brett's sentiments about the lack of importance given to these practices and I'll be happy.
I will also provide my full apologies for my ignorance.
It has to be borne in mind though, that the title "Junior Member" on this site is simply a measure of the number of postings on this site -and is not a measure of the experience or expertise of the poster.
Food for thought.