Forum Moderators: open
Yes, it must have been fixed. It was there since the update.
IMHO, depenalizing a site after it has cleaned up it's act is fair. As for how long, first off that should depend on whether the site commercial or non-commercial, or if it stands to gain at someone else's loss.
Anon27's idea of a point system is a good one, though, like PR, I think it should be something kept inside the Googlplex.
Do it twice (no matter what it is), and the domain is out, but an appeal can be made, and it'll cost you if you're commercial. Three times, and your outta the game.
In your message 120 in this thread, you asked about multiple pages from the one site being ranked for a single search. I actually tried to answer that back in msg 81 - when Anon27 made the same comment:
Anon27 - regarding that travel example - technically, each result is from a different server name (ie the names before the first dot are different) - so thats why they all appear in the serps. There is no compulsion to make a server name www infront of your domain name - ie you can call your server any name you like - and have lots of them eg.
red.widgets.com
blue widgets.com
pink.widgets.com
etc
- you don't have to call it www.widgets.com
ie www.widgets.com/blue and www.widgets.com/red are both on the same server/in the same domain - and therefore Google generally only lists 2 pages in the serps. But it would, under the same 'rule' list 2 pages from red.widgets.com and 2 from pink.widgets.com and so on......
Does this explain it? They are different server names - same domain name - www doesn't have to be the server name - convention just says that your mail server is called mail.mydomain.com, ftp server is ftp.mydomain.com and webserver is www.mydomain.com - google treats each one (and rightly so) as a different server.
Chris_D
Yah, good example of bad seo. The goal is to avoid multiple listings not to gain them. If you build your site with canonicals, don't do it just to optimize all the same keyword / phrase. Don't flame about canonicals, please. ;) If used properly they are great for themeing a site!
In this case, it's either done to manipulate or because they don't know it better.
The problem seems to be that Google is afraid of penalizing innocent sites with a big algorithm change. So why not do this:
Have two algorithms. The one you have now, and a much tighter one that will cull much of the spam. In one update you have today's algorithm and in the next you run the tight one. This way every second month the spam will disappear from view. It won't take those guys long to realise what's going on and clean up their act. After all, why would they want to miss one month in two in the SERPS?
Of course some innocent sites will be hit, but they'll still be there every second month, and if they are smart, they'll also take a look at their design. Google could give some information on their spam report about the sort of things that might innocently trip the filter for these webmasters to look at.
It would be controversial for sure, but I think a lot of whining would stop here on this board.
Thanks for the prompt - I see where you are coming from now. :)
Agreed, put like that, those examples were spam. I now understand a possible reason why the algo did not pick the example up.
Some spammers even have quite sufer-useful sites, which carry cpntent. It's just that having 4 or 5 domains in the same top ten is pushing it a bit far IMO.
Without going into URLs, each domain is similar and having checked whois, are all owned by the same people. But how do you class it as spam if it carries reasonable content?
You could possibly class it as multiple copies of the same theme....
On the whole I think Google is fair, and longevity is only attained by playing fair.
Do NOT give PR penalties or bans to sites that have hidden text. Leave the page in the index.
The penalty should be to remove the hidden keywords from the lookup, even if they are also visible on the page.
A page that has the text "Friends, Romans, Countrymen" with the keyword "Romans" in hidden test would show up for searches on:
friends
countrymen
friends countrymen
but not for:
romans
friends romans
romans countrymen
friends romans countrymen
This just seems to me like a great way to make the punishment fit the crime. It would also confuse the $#¦+ out of them until they figure out what is going on.
Since Google doesn't provide a clear cut list of what it considers illegal and instead prefers to keep its guidelines awfully vague ... doesn't it seem fair that Google should send an email warning to a problematic site indicating exactly what Google's concern is and giving the site x days to clean up their act?
Feel free to check out a spam report with my name in the comments field :)
Thanks for a great site.
how about a little fair warning first?
Not in the case of hidden text. Hidden text has clearly been against the TOS for years.
What about;
1) Cloaking (I think at least a year)
2) Multiple duplicate content sites (I think the domains should be toast for good, unless they become expired). I am talking about 4 or 5 plus sites here. I know some owners have a legit need for more than one (Google for example), regional for example. But most do not.
3) Same owner / group sister sites that target the same keywords. I have seen a group of sites that try to be different from each other (although they often share the exact same text in places), but target the same keywords with reciprocal linking. So, the red wotsits site targets blue widgets as a keyword. Thus all the group monopolize certain key words, when they should not (based on their content).
That is a brilliant idea!
Can you imagine it? Heaps of spammy people get tossed out - they then clean up their act - and are back in (not because of what they did - just because the algo went soft)- the spammers change back to their spammy stuff again for the next index - and they are straight out because the hard algo operates that month!
I love it!
:)
It could be called the 'Keem em guessing' algo - or the 'tear your hair out' algo!
I sent another spam report in on friday and flagged it "attention Googleguy".
It has nothing to do with me, it is actually a site I learned about on one of the usenet forums.
Anyhow, I posted something about this on friday, but gremlins ate it or something - my post is nowhere to be found.
Please do check it out, because it appears to be an exploit of some sort.
Thanks again for checking the other reports I posted.
I just submitted a couple of spammers one with hidden text at the top of the page and the other with a JavaScript redirect. The JS one really surprised me because they are one of the biggest names in the industry. They have an h1 stuffed page that redirects anybody with a browser version (not bots).
For the penalty time I think that these people saying 1 year or longer would have a different view if they got picked up on something trivial and were banned. That could put a company out of business with the volume of traffic that search engines provide.
Like said before if the site cleans up their act put them on a waiting list to be reviewed and then let them back in. You could be loosing valuable content by banning a site.
A year ago before I found WW I was using hidden text and hidden links on my main page. I soon changed it after I heard horror stories. I could only imagine how long ago I would have to start looking for another job if I had been banned way back then for my ignorance.
set a length that gets the message across
I would be fine with a long term ban if there were a list of Do's and Dont's
There must be a defined list that would identify spam. That way, you know you're doing it so here's your chance to stop, or else.....
Google is not a law firm. Every rule you lay down gives rise to grey areas, and hence more rules. Your suggestions would lead to the Google version of the Magna Carta. Then we'd need special internet lawyers to interpret it for us.
The internet is complicated enough without the rule makers getting involved.
Company X made a site, called it Company Y, used extensive spam to win out the serps for certain geographic key phrases, and then pass on some of this relevance to clients for Company X via hidden links. They've even got a Dmoz and Goolge directory listing! I guess they inserted the spam afterwards...
For me, this deliberate sort of abuse deserves a harsh penalty - especially since these are commercial sites. The TOS is there for a reason, it's available for all to read. I think that the mock up site and the sites that they have linked to should be banned for a year.
The 'root' company site should get a two or three month penalty for sure - and pay a fine to get back in.
Since Google doesn't provide a clear cut list of what it considers illegal and instead prefers to keep its guidelines awfully vague ... doesn't it seem fair that Google should send an email warning to a problematic site indicating exactly what Google's concern is and giving the site x days to clean up their act?
1) For reasons of scalability alone, Google prefers to deal with spam with its algorithm whenever possible. Notification and subsequent review would just add to Google's already high cost of fighting spam.
2) Webmasters and SEOs who use tricks like hidden text are, by definition, trying to subvert Google's search results. They've made their bed; why shouldn't they be expected to lie in it?
3) As for the claim that Google's guidelines are "awfully vague," I'd say that guidelines like "Avoid hidden text or hidden links," "Don't employ cloaking or sneaky redirects," and Avoid "doorway" pages created just for search engines" are quite specific (not to mention perfectly clear).
I would be fine with a long term ban if there were a list of Do's and Dont's
See:
[google.com...]
>>3) As for the claim that Google's guidelines are "awfully vague," I'd say that guidelines like "Avoid hidden text or hidden links," "Don't employ cloaking or sneaky redirects," and Avoid "doorway" pages created just for search engines" are quite specific (not to mention perfectly clear).
How about soliciting links from links pages? This isn't defined as spamming, but that's what it is. It's subverting Google's algorithm via another route. Google has no policy on this so I'd say their position is vague.
Actually they mention that you should not join link schemes, but then is asking another webmaster for a link a link scheme if it is mildly relevant?
As far as the spam penalty. Would it be too hard to implement a system that if you used google's add url page for the URL of a banned site, it would say something like:
This site has not been added to the list of sites to be crawled. It is currently under penalty for violating our guidelines. More information regarding Google's guidelines is available at: [google.com...]
If you have removed all content that violates our guidelines, you may use our recinclusion request form after 3 months.
Google reserves the right to remove websites from its search results at any time. Changing a website that has violated our guidelines does not guarantee for reinclusion.
Anyhow, I am sure you have someone that can come up with a better paragraph than that.
The point is, that if a site is spamming the index, this would not only confirm it, but it would point any interested party to a page that would explain in detail what types of naughty activity actually incurred the penalty, and hopefully lead them to the path of the straight and narrow!
The key issue in the e-mail is that our sales are influenced by our ranking in Google. We are making efforts to reduce our dependency on Google, but we can't help the fact that most people looking for our services use Google.
The E-mail:
The problem is that Google has so much of the market captured that if we don't have good rankings on Google, we don't do good on the web. Your search engine has the ability to make or break a web based business. We find our sales fluctuating in-line with our ranking. It doesn't get any better than that for you, but it sure scares us little guys to death. What concerns me is that competitors are cheating to gain market share and there is nothing that the rest of us can do without resorting to their tactics.
I have been under the assumption that your Google Bots are able to identify blatant SPAM on web pages and take actions accordingly. But I have noticed that virtually everyone above us cheats in some fashion.
For example, I am the webmaster for sites that are in a very competitive market arena right now. The two top sites when you search for the keywords "------", "------", and a bunch of other competitive search terms are [------...] and [--------------....]
I have found dozens of hidden keywords and graphic links on those sites. I have used the SPAM report page for months trying to level the playing field so that we are able to be competitive without cheating. I guess those guys are very busy, I never get a response, so I keep trying. I'm sure they get dozens/hundreds of e-mails a day.
I have some of the hidden text at the bottom of this e-mail. There are hundreds of hidden keywords (text color matches background) and graphics links (barely noticeable dots and bars that are light blue in color embedded throughout the site). I thought that the Google spiders were able to recognize text that was the same color as the background. This site is pretty much loaded with everything you are not supposed to do yet he remains number one for all search terms in my line of business. Does this mean that Google spiders don't do this type of advanced evaluation? If they don't I am in big trouble.
Please help us to be able to compete fairly by either making sure the spiders can pick up SPAM during indexing or by being more responsive to SPAM reports. I hope that the folks in both those areas understand how important your search engine is to us.
If that is how your spam reports read, I am not surprised that you aren't getting anywhere. And you say you are writing to Google daily about this? That is too much. You are just making a pest of yourself.
First, pick ONE site. Report only that site. Do not whine about your business or lack thereof.
List one important search term where they come up high.
List the exact URL of that page.
List what they are doing that blatantly violates Google's TOS
Explain exactly what they should look for on that specific page.
Forget about it for at least a month, and go back to working on your own site.
Your letter is centered on *your ranking*! That is not what a spam report is supposed ot be about. It is about another site.
Do everything that you can to make it easy for them to find and identify the problem. Everyone likes it when other people make their job easier. Make the spam examiner's job as easy as possible.
