Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
Forum Moderators: open
Have just created a few "ethically" (!) cloaked mini-sites on different domains, all xreferenced and was wondering how to get them into Google ASAP.bearing in mind the recent refresh.
Do I just submit each cloaked page as standard or is it any advantage to pay for an Ad?
If I do pay for an ad for my cloaked url & its reviewed by a human, am I just asking for trouble or is this rhetorical?
Thx in advance
Adwords and getting in the index are not really related. If you want to be in the index then submit the cloaked sites and wait for the refresh. If you decide to buy some clicks then cloaking doesn't really figure into it. There are a number of sites that were already in the index and then adwords were purchased for them. Presumably the Google staff would have reviewed the pages intended for regular visitors for those sites and I don't see any harm having come to them.
Anyone have a similar or contrary experience?
Speaking of cloaking & Google, does anyone use:
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Pragma" CONTENT="no-cache"> on the Google-optimised page and how does it rate against their proprietary NOARCHIVE tag?
Not being an expert, I've seen it mentioned briefly in 1 or 2 places but am wondering what (if any) is the downside seeing as most cloakers are wary of any potential witchhunt of those that use the noarchive tag?
As this is my first big foray into this area, I'm just "slighty" nervous about all this so if I could get an answer on the above I'd be really happy :)
I would not use <META HTTP-EQUIV="Pragma" CONTENT="no-cache"> to prevent Google from caching (it doesn't work, it use to), as a result I would rate it as poor.
>wondering what (if any) is the downside
I guess the poor rating pretty much answers this question.
If your scripts in perl well then you're outta luck.
I'm not sure I follow, what you describe is pretty much what a cloaking script does whether Perl or PHP (or any other language), but I think I am missing your point, help!!
I am not sure if the "pragma" format works on other engines, it is supposed to keep browsers from caching, so it might have some undesireable effects by slowing down the page rendering for your visitors.
My experience has been that it has not hurt my rankings when used. However, in the Google forum, a rep from Google stated fairly directly that sites using the "nocache" tag had been more closely scruitinized for spamming violations.
I also was kicked from altavista today temporarily on one of my clients sites because a human went and either reported me or a person from the company saw it? They didn't catch my cloaking....lol even after I told them to examine the site. They found my cloaked pages from either their database of my site or from the cached pages but I use such a sneaky tactic that they can't even get the source nor would they even believe it's anything more than an old page with 4 words on it. Saved my a$$. LoL I can't believe an altavista search engine representive told me what a cloaked illeagle page I had up looked like.....omg, it was staring him right in the face, and he just said it's an old page that new one's need to replace it or we will not list you until the site is finished.
What I don't understand if everyone's (search engines) ignoring the noarchive then what's the point of even having it? If google is recording these sites with noarchive on it then inspecting it then they are archiving it and furthermore exposing cloaked sites. So I guess we really shouldn't noarchive our pages unless we're begging for company from search engines to inspect our sites.
Who knows. I feel that after reading all of that about noarchive it just seems like you're putting yourself on the radar. I'm going to test it with my new SEO marketing invention when it gets out of beta testing which should pretty much make any keyword number 1 on most any search engine which will clearly put me right on the radar screen.
While I'm on the google subject, has anyone noticed google putting sites at top ten/1 positions? I've run some sites through some of my analyzers and they do not come close to googles ranking algorithm or even come close to an optimized site.
I believe you're getting those results on your analysis because a lot of the characteristics Google uses to rank a page are off-site.
If I've said it once, I've said it a million times... I don't bother submitting cloaked pages to Google. It's more effective to get your home page listed and work building relevent link popularity.