Forum Moderators: open
I have always been a big Google fan and my admiration remains in tact ... but I am concerned that the recent displays of inconsistent update scheduling may have detrimental effects on the perception of Google's stability for webmasters world wide. I realize that it has only been a few months of erratic behaviour, but radical changes send up a red flag for me and signals that perhaps, like DMOZ, they may be experiencing technical problems which could drag on indefinitely. This isn't an unreasonable perception as we have all seen it happen to major search engines such as Alta Vista and Excite (amongst others) in the past couple of years.
We've also all noted that the Google team have been busy "tweaking" the algorithm substantially from month to month of late, producing glaring changes in the PR of various sites. They go up and down, links are lost and gained. But through it all, search results don't seem to change too drastically ... and inquiries don't seem to be affected to a large extent. This has provided a certain sense of security for us all. But is this a false security?
I have this nagging feeling in the pit of my stomach that something is wrong at Google. I can't explain it ... its just there.
The only other time this happened to me was when I "felt" there might be a problem with Inktomi. Certain things began to happen (at canada.com) and although I was assured by many in the know that there was nothing at all wrong ... it turned out in the end that I was absolutely right. It was, in fact, the beginning of what was a very major blip which took Inktomi nearly two years to recover from. In my opinion, they have never really recovered from that "blip" and it left a gaping hole in internet search which allowed Google to ride into the fray and pen the deal with Yahoo, which nobody can argue, kick started their domination as "the" internet search provider.
I've done little to my site since the last update and none of what I did was to try to advance my ranking in the SERPS ... so I can honestly say that I have no reason to have the jitters. My feelings are inexplicable I admit, and I apologize to those of you whom I may have managed to upset more so than you already might be. I just have that same nagging feeling I had when, what I refer to as the great Inktomi crash of 2001, took place. Its very worrisome.
My question is ... do any of the senior members and mods of WebmasterWorld have any of the same concerns? I have good reason to trust my gut instincts ... but (obviously) none of you do. I'd like to know if any of you have raised an eyebrow more than once in the past few months in regards to Google's update behaviour? If so, what are your concerns and why?
My apologies to GoogleGuy and those who feel this post may provoke a panic situation. My intentions are pure and I simply want to know if the senior members and mods feel that there may be something up at Google? If I were a member of the "subscribers forum", I would save this question for that arena. Alas, not yet ... but soon I hope! :)
So, if the update starts anytime within a few days, it's not that erratic and it's not like there was ever a set schedule to begin with. Well, except for the schedule that we set ;)
No worries here :)
I have no suspicion of technical problems, the Fresh updates are working as smooth as silk on a daily basis. In fact, I've wondered if it's possible that the update had happened and slipped by un-noticed.
I think it's very easy to get on edge before an update, wondering if widespread penalties will hit all around us. I still kind of feel like something could hit, it's just that nothing has for so long. We do know that there's a major change regarding disallowing links for previously expired domains that was supposed to roll out over the course of a few months. That seems like it would be more difficult to implement for some reason, especially if there are other changes coming concurrently.
There may be a lot of extended testing going on - just as a guess at possibilities. There's no way to know. But it's reached the point where I wouldn't be surprised if the Fresh listings just went along as usual and there were no update at all this time. I don't know, but it wouldn't upset or surprise me.
I suppose they could skip this one altogether, and just have their next update a couple of days before the conference in Boston. Maybe even that very day!
Dinna that already happen this year, and perhaps last year too?
I'm fine with the world myself, but if I count correctly, there was an update in January and one in March.
Day 8, month 4 is dawning soon where I sit. I'm not expecting a double up in the next 22 days.
Over the next few months, I think you'll see more emphasis at Google on scalable algorithms rather than responding to individual spam reports--please set your expectations accordingly--
Adding an algo to neutralise heavy crosslinking of domains, over-done reciprocal linking, and the guestbook issue could take some time! :)
An estimated monthly index growth of 3% [webmasterworld.com] plus all the new added links in the existing index, should keep those servers busy on Pagerank iterations.
I'm suprised they can keep up on averaging a one-monthly update.
Or, Googleguy was just admitting that Google intends to ignore spam reports even more than they do now.
The advice that I like to quote is from Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Don't Panic. If you think about it, tonight was the last night of "March Madness," the NCAA tournament. But you don't hear basketball fans worrying too much. :)
That's my perspective at least. I haven't been hanging around over the last few days, but I'm glad that we have so many people around here to keep an eye on Google and let us know what they think about how we can do better.
Except the basketball fans who are webmasters. ;)
Keep it up GG... I can see the headlines now WebmasterWorld reaches 1 billion membership milestone for GoogleDance!
I haven't been hanging around over the last few days,
I think that it's what worries a lot of people around here, the fact that you weren't there to settle things down.
We were wondering, and asking ourselves when will the next update happend and/or why it is taking so long to update. A lot of us thought the 1st then the 3 and finally the 6.
I think you said a week or so ago (on April Fools day), that we should calm down, the update wasn't close to happening. And since then (almost) nothing. People either thought it was a joke, or thought it'll happend the day after, as part of a sadistic joke from you guy at the Googleplex :).
I must say that I am concerned about the update, but not as much as two weeks ago and less than last week. I just wait now and hope it's close to D day.
I think that just droping a post with something like:
'He webmaster guys, we work hard to make our algo better to catch hidden text, we're almost there and when we are it will rock the index', could have some unexpected benefical effects: ie people will know what happend and won't be over concerned by the delay from the schedule, and those who read threads here and use these technics will have a panic attack :)
Thanks for the feedback you gave us GG.
Leo
ps. how about doing a deep crawl form where you're ready and updating after that, is that technically possible? Will get you 'almost' back on schedule. don't know just a thought.
Is it still too early to worry now, or it the testing almost over?! 24 hours, three days? :)
I realize that it has only been a few months of erratic behaviour, but radical changes send up a red flag for me and signals that perhaps, like DMOZ, they may be experiencing technical problems which could drag on indefinitely....
I have this nagging feeling in the pit of my stomach that something is wrong at Google. I can't explain it ... its just there.
Why worry so much about google? The worst that could happen would be that we'd have to go on last month's update + freshbot results for a few days, which IMO is not too shabby.
I am concerned that the recent displays of inconsistent update scheduling may have detrimental effects on the perception of Google's stability for webmasters world wide.
For better or for worse, Google has little need to cater to the interests of webmasters. Google is all about the user experience, they have no obligation to webmasters to deliver an update every X number of weeks just to put us at ease. While recent and relevent results enhance the user experience, freshbot seems to have that covered reasonably well.
Google is a small company doing a monumental task rather well, so I wouldn't worry if things aren't always on the assumed schedule. I'm sure they could just let everything run on auto pilot for the next couple months without many people noticing, but they seem to be at least somewhat concerned about quality, so taking a few extra days to get things done right must be worth so much more from their perspective than appeasing paranoid webmasters.
Back in early 2000, Google updates would sometimes take three months or more. It was a little strange to see someone in another thread saying that things were dire because "Google is taking five weeks!"
I can't agree with that at all. Webmasters = Customers (or the agents of customers). Customers being those people who pay Google for Adwords and Ads.
Quite apart from that, webmasters are probably the most influential people on the web. Is that important? Too right... much of Google's rise to fame and fortune came on the back of the recommendations of these folks, especially in the early days (when I thought I was the only Google user!).
That favor can turnaround very quickly: Rumours ebbing and flowing that Google has lost its way and Search Engine X is the 'new Google' could only realistically emerge from webmasters, but would quickly catch fire if the right situation emerged.
Yes, webmasters are important to Google, and of course vice versa. It's a RELATIONSHIP that MUST and does work in both directions.
Webmaster to Google: I have spoken before of a 'social contract'.... basically the right way of doing things. Yes, you can SEO big time and in some sectors get a really shabby spammy site to #1. Risky, but more importantly, not particularly ethical. If you are going to push the bag a bit, make sure the site is decent and on topic. That's what most people on here do.... the webmaster's side of the bargain (or contract).
Google to Webmasters: Communication, openness, honesty in the SERPS inclusion (no tricks or paid placements) and a degree of stability. If Google continues down this track there will be no reason at all for the above scenario to emerge, certainly in the short-medium term. Webmasters have every opportunity, if they work hard enough and create a quality site, to emerge into public glare. That's the Google side of the bargain.
It's balance which both sides must generally keep if it is to work.
The risks are either that too many webmasters will take the rogue route, or that Google will stray from its script. For the latter, the biggest risk may well actually be stability, which I sense is what Liane is concerned about.... maybe another PR0 type onslaught.
It may happen, but don't think it will. Why? Well:
a) Google ain't broke, so it doesn't need fixing. They must know that.
b) Things have changed since the PR0, and we don't see many examples of really bad sites polluting the top end of their SERPS. Again, no need to apply radical medicine.
c) Google is probably more aware of the dynamics of the web community than I am. Why would they upset rafts of webmasters (given their importance) for so little benefit. Just not necessary.
So on balance (again) I see no drastic changes on the short term radar. At least from a business perspective I don't. However... Google is still a search engine... and search engines do take crazy self-defeating decisions.
For better or for worse, Google has little need to cater to the interests of webmasters.
I disagree. That's like saying that a publisher only cares about the reader. If there were no writers ... what the heck would they publish?
We are all in this together. They need us as much as we need them. Without webmasters to supply the sites they serve up ... what exactly is Google?
Yes, they (quite rightly) put an emphasis on the user experience, but without webmasters, there would be nothing for the user to experience. :)
Why would Googleguy hang out here if Google weren't concerned with the interests of webmasters? We are their writers and they are our publishers. It is a symbiotic relationship and Google is savy enough to know that what "we" think matters.
[added] Napoleon beat me to it! :)
If Google feels that it needs another week or even another month to avoid putting out SERPs that will cause them to lose users then that is what is best for us as well. Who else is going to step in with untainted results at the moment? (...and that's my position despite a slight robots.txt mistake for the previous index. Most careless, but I'd still rather Google took a long term view to supplying me with traffic :) )
>> For better or for worse, Google has little need to cater to the interests of webmasters <<
I can't agree with that at all. Webmasters = Customers (or the agents of customers). Customers being those people who pay Google for Adwords and Ads.Quite apart from that, webmasters are probably the most influential people on the web. Is that important? Too right... much of Google's rise to fame and fortune came on the back of the recommendations of these folks, especially in the early days (when I thought I was the only Google user!).
That favor can turnaround very quickly: Rumours ebbing and flowing that Google has lost its way and Search Engine X is the 'new Google' could only realistically emerge from webmasters, but would quickly catch fire if the right situation emerged.
Yes, webmasters are important to Google, and of course vice versa. It's a RELATIONSHIP that MUST and does work in both directions.
Webmaster to Google: I have spoken before of a 'social contract'.... basically the right way of doing things. Yes, you can SEO big time and in some sectors get a really shabby spammy site to #1. Risky, but more importantly, not particularly ethical. If you are going to push the bag a bit, make sure the site is decent and on topic. That's what most people on here do.... the webmaster's side of the bargain (or contract).
Google to Webmasters: Communication, openness, honesty in the SERPS inclusion (no tricks or paid placements) and a degree of stability. If Google continues down this track there will be no reason at all for the above scenario to emerge, certainly in the short-medium term. Webmasters have every opportunity, if they work hard enough and create a quality site, to emerge into public glare. That's the Google side of the bargain.
Consider Google's current stance. Whether intentional or simply due to a lack of concern on google's part, there has been little to no communication, unexplainable penalties, and unpredictable updates. Meanwhile, many webmasters use questionable practices to promote their site and artificially inflate their SERPs. In short, its an adversarial relationship. Yet google has flourished.
Clearly they see no imminent need for this to change, despite their New Years resolution. Adwords is a separate service, and if you're a big advertiser you can likely get some real support there, but again its very separate (and rightly so) from the normal listings.
The momentum that google has is unlikely to shift as a result of a few peeved webmasters, so why should they go out of their way to serve us? Don't get me wrong, in certain ways I think they should do better, but where's the benefit to them? In many ways I think the more "access" webmasters have to anyone at google, the more the integrity of their results is in question. From their actions and lack thereof, I think we can infer that google either feels the same way or just doesn't want to devote the manpower/resources to handle any sort of serious communication with webmasters. I can't say I blame them in either case. I'm sure they get a few thousand spam reports a day, and having a pair of human eyes looking over each one, evaluating, and possibly taking action may not be feasible. Imagine opening up even more lines of communication...it would get messy and bureaucratic real fast, 2 things that I think would ultimately cause further degradation of search results.
Sure, there are webmasters who abuse Google and spam big time. But for every one of them there are hundreds who don't, and who show a little repsect for the two way relationship (even if they don't know it).
For Google, no they are not perfect. BUT, look at it in a relative sense. Compare them with some of the other SEs and search providers. Looksmart if you want an example?
I think Google tries to tow a reasonably ethical line and has not thus far embarked upon a path to cause deliberate grief to webmasters. In fairness Google has generally been fairly careful and conservative for at least 12 months, hopefully because they recognize their responsibility, just as many webmasters now do.
I just hope I am not tempting fate with all that... and that they don't now make me look an idiot by introducing a PRsuperZERO penalty!
Of course Google doesn't have an interest in kissing webmaster a$$.
Their interest is in Adwords.
After 20 years reading SEC filings I'd really like to see one company claim "respect for 2 way relationships"
Like a marriage between Google and SEO's for example. You never know...
Sigh...
SLY OLD DOG ARE YOU SUGGESTING GOOGLE IS TRYING TO MAKE A BUCK HERE?
Baaaddd sly ooold dog! No way.
Googleguy is our bestest best friend in the whole wide planet. Shame on you.
Take a look above. There are plenty of people here who feel their relationship with Google is special in some way. I'm just stating the obvious for those people still living in denial.
You believe so, watson?
>Take a look above.
I am looking firmly above.
>I'm just stating the obvious for those people still living in denial.
Again here I suppose?
