Google cached pages

[joep]

1. When you serve a cloaked page to Google, it will come up in the cached pages, correct?

2. Some may advice to use user adress along with IP delivery.
Is this necessary?

[Air]

Yes it will show up in the cache, unless you use a "no-cache" tag, then it will not be cached by Google. There is some debate about what happens to your ranking if you "ask" google not to cache, I haven't seen it hurt my rankings. Some other opinions on this would be useful.

[eljefe3]

I am in a pretty heavily spammed industry and have seen the no cache work just fine. However, Brett has crunched a lot of numbers and his stats seem contrary to what Air's and my findings indicate. Brett??

[PeteU]

Cloaking with nocache tag works fine and like Air said I could not see any penalty for using it, except that it attracts loosers whose idea of moving up in ranking is to report on cloaking competition. ;)
I'm not sure what you mean by user address, but it is sufficient to have IP and user agent info for all cloaking algorithms.
I also check refer variable if there is one I bypass SE checks (spiders don't have refers) and go straight to surfers display. This saves some proccessing load on CPU

[rpking]

Is nobody worried about the clear Google statement opposing cloaking? Or is there no evidence of them banning sites that have been caught cloaking?

I'm not sure whether or not to rely on the distort their search rankings get out clause. I'm a firm believer in the ethical use of cloaking - some of us have to use it to have any chance at all with the sites we are given to promote - but I'm still wary of cloaking for Google.

[Marshall Clark]

Right now I'm playing around with a Google no-caching technique that uses IP Delivery and a javascript redirect that I think might work. I put an 0 sec. redirect on the IP Delivered Google version of the page that redirects to an appropriate user site page. When a user tries to view the cached Google page they are redirected before they have a chance to see my Google spider code.

I'm also playing around with using an external .js request instead of the on-the-page javascript, but I've never used this type of thing before...I'll keep you posted if you're interested.

[Air]

Marshall,

That's an interesting approach, redirect the cached page. But isn't that easy to spot. it won't have any of those yellow "blotches" on it?

>I'll keep you posted if you're interested

yes, please do.

[tedster]

Marshall,

That's a very clever idea. Please keep us posted.

[Marshall Clark]

yes you would be able to spot it.....

maybe I should make a few different landing pages with the Google header and I'll add the yellow blocks myself! ;)

[Marshall Clark]

props go to Jim Heard for the original idea - he posted it with the installation guide for IP Food.

[stn24]

To Marshall's idea about client side 0 second script redirect. In my opinion anyone who at least knows little bit about what they are doing would reload the page with scripting disabled. Not that i'd want to discourage you, I just think that you need a server side component for something like this to work.

[stn24]

To Marshall's idea about client side 0 second script redirect. In my opinion anyone who at least knows little bit about what they are doing would reload the page with scripting disabled. Not that i'd want to discourage you, I just think that you need a server side component for something like this to work.

[seoboy]

i have to agree with stn24. the javascript will do 0 to prevent code theft. but if your main concern is user experience, then its a straightforward solution.

seoboy