Forum Moderators: open
I'm back... just browsing, but feel I should re-cap what many people are missing (because it is buried well back in the thread now).
There are two phenomena
a) Algo/filter changes. These are being played out on SJ, and of course: if you are testing a change you use older tried and tested data, which is what Google has done (with a dash of Fresh). Hence all the missing links, strangely dropping sites, etc.
b) The update, with the application of the latest data and links.
It was spelled out earlier that the results on SJ will change when newer data, and this months crawl data, is brought in. However, the SJ effect may replicate at other centers before that data upgrade is applied.
I think that's an accurate reflection of reality, and the message is therefore don't panic. For those who have suffered on SJ, it might get worse before it gets better, but wait until the new data is in there before you throw a wobbler.
GoogleGuy said:
we're starting slowly on hidden text by taking sites that have been mentioned in a spam report.
and:mcavic, I think I did say that newer backlinks and spam snapshots would be pending to be applied over time. Or at least I tried to. :)
No need to panic yet, as it seems they are aware that there are backlinks missing (like all but one of mine!)
It also seems that there is no need for 'spam fallout' just yet either. But I'll admit, I've got the SR page bookmarked and a whole list of new ones to write in about! (or are these old ones, just back for a peek before algo'ed away?)
Saw lots of yahoo groups messages near top. Time to start posting messages on groups.
IITian, think long term. Look at rfgdxm1 post above.
Google wants relevant, spam free results more than any of us do :)
My hunch is that they're old ones that will be algo'd away shortly. I like the way you use that word. :) But definitely keep the SR page bookmarked in case they don't get algo'd. :)
People comment about backlinks dropping... unless you have a free for all link exchange. All THOSE crap sites rise in the rankings (and show more backlinks)!
Keyword garbage everywhere, useless links appearing, sites with ZERO content ranked #1 (just points a link to the #2 listed site!).
If this was April 1st I'd get it, but I haven't found any aspect of this that is even close to better than before. (And the fresher thing don't cut it, old dead sites are here en masse.)
Really, is there *anything* this index does better than the last?
[edited by: steveb at 12:30 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]
It's an interesting dynamic - once an algo gets changed - I wonder how long it takes for the net to react to re-optimize or in manny cases take advantage of it.
One strength of google has been the difficulty to manipulate the results, but if the main factor becomes on-page factors then manipulation becomes a lot easier. Although when everybody is in on the act it then becomes difficult to predict what the final serps could look like down the line. No doubt google will go back to more difficult to manipulate algo once the serps turn to crap - which they will within a couple of months of the net getting wind of the algo behind -sj.
algo'd
Careful with that Googleguy, I would hate to see Google get sued by Algorithm.com.
;P
My hunch is that they're old ones that will be algo'd away shortly. I like the way you use that word. :)
Here's to us using it in the future to describe spammy sites that disappear from the serps!
The key words for my some of most popular pages gave them a SERP 1, but on sj they are SERP 20+.
Hope this is a nightmare and I wake up soon. :(
Why do I think so:
1) Index is very old, like Dec/Jan.
2) It appears at one moment on SJ, even regular update takes time to appear constantly on same datacenter.
3) huge quantity of spam prove that it was urgent to setup something working.
[edited by: ramitheweb at 12:43 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]
That's true but throwing content out the window and using the obvious spam has too many risks, unless you have a jillion disposable URLs to be "fresh" one day and banned the next.
Buy Hormel stock, spam is the flavor of the month.
After submitting you those Spam reports, and your guys acting on them (some, not the second bunch I sent you). And following advice on site maps, etc. I managed to get my site on the first page.
Now it has gone on sj, and the guys with many sites (mostly duplicate), some just fronts with generic info, are dominating again.
What is the point in having the same people with 4 sites, basically selling the same thing, dominating the first 4 postions on a competitive key phrase search? What makes it worse is that the other group of Spammers have postion 5 onwards.
I know I am right when I see the largest, most authoritive site for this area (not mine) gone - absolutely canned. And these guys do not have a link exchange in site.
It seems that I (and others) will have to spend less time building quality sites, and more time submitting them to guest books and ffa pages. Sorry, but these sj results are terrible - really bad.
BTW, I love my resaults. :):):) We all know that if you love your resaults, your happy. If you don't like it, then you call the site above you, SPAM, even if it's a quality site. Every one does that.
Since this is such a short thread, I see no reason not to post another stupid question. :)
GG - Could you give a better definition of 'next iteration'?
I honestly have tried not to use 'questionable' tactics in the design of my site. I have less pages in the -sj index than I had in the April update and yet I had many, many, more pages crawled.
Why would Google bother crawling my site over a multiple day period if it was not destined for inclusion in the update?
I have waited many months for the results I had hoped to see in the coming index. I don't mind waiting another month if that is what's going to happen. I just like to see a little light at the end of the tunnel. I also am still not clear on if this is the 'new data' or if that may be applied this month after -sj is included?
Sign me - Dazed and Confused
"If you don't like it, then you call the site above you, SPAM, even if it's a quality site. Every one does that."
Rubbish. I will happily give the search phrase I used here and point out the replicated sites (not that you need much help) and tell you the authoritive sites (which have now effectively gone). If Google can justify these, they can put Saddam back in office.
[edited by: crobb305 at 12:48 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]
two more sj results spam reports - site using domain and subdomains to mirror results, and has duplicate pages listed in the SERPs.
flagged it with my nick and your name.
[edited by: PatrickDeese at 12:50 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]
I just submitted a spamreport starting with: For "GoogleGuy" on webmasterworld from "peterdaly".
It regards a site filled with keyword stuffed alt tags, that dissapeared after the last "dance." (Good thing) You mentioned something about a hidden text filter in response to a posting of mine. The site is now back in the listings, including on sj. How long it's been back, I don't know.
The filter was good based on my small interactions of it. I think it should go back on, or if it still is there, be tweaked at least enough to filter out my example.
Thanks for an time you put into this, and other reports like this. Most of us really appreciate it.
-Pete
anyone same results?
2) 4 new sites, 2 months old, PR7 on current google, placed on pages 4..6, on SJ all of them has PR0 and placed on first page 1, on positions 2-5 for very competitive keywords.
From my perspective, I like what I see. It also helps that I know what direction things are going though.
Thanks for this little bit GoogleGuy. I get what you are saying, and as you, like me, don't like people who violate the Google TOS, I'm gonna sit back and look forward to that new spam filter.
and thanks for coming here and dealing with all of us mr.greengoogle, I mean mr. googlespam, uh, I mean mr.googlespan ;-]
Near as I can tell Google has abandoned the concept of pagerank and replaced it with speedy html creation.
Forget Bret's one year plan. Now it can be done in a week:
Make a lot of disposable pages;
make a lot of link exchanges for no other purpose than to exchange links;
sign guestbooks everywhere.
Repeat.
Ugh.
<edit forgot domain name in URL, even bigger than before>
[edited by: steveb at 1:05 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]
for instance, an article that came out in 2002 -
url'd as:
[money.cnn.com...]
is shown as ARTICLE TITLE April 8, 2003 in Google, and following the link the title tag has today's date and the dateline is now today's date.
this appears to be an attempt to manipulate google news and or freshbot.
I didn't file a spam report for this, but I am sure it is easy to check, but sticky me or what ever if you need a "real" URL.
