Forum Moderators: open
Everytime google changes something it alters the distribution of income on the web. we are all to blame for allowing google to gain near monopoly power.
At first google was insanely great, now its insanely irritating.
I am going to start using ATW and teoma and encourage everyone I know to explore non-google options. If this becomes a trend the web won't be so dependent on google for the distribution of web dollars.
This might encourage google to look at its business ecology. Quite simply it doesnt have one. It doesnt help business' on the web and isn't interested in sharing income. It doesn't publish any rules and changes them on whim. This lack of business ecology is going to seriously hamper its momentum going forward imho.
Are you reading this google? we want some stability and certainty! and to the point we want cooperation.
Now I know that it's been said that this was intentional, and that this process will improve SERPs in the future (hopefully). But the whole spin we've seen on this change so far reminds me of an Abraham Lincoln story:
While giving a discourse to an audience on why slavery should be abolished, Mr. Lincoln was asked by a member of the crowd "Mr. Lincoln, if slavery is so wrong then why don't you just pass the legislation to get rid of it?"
Mr. Lincoln answered with a question: "Sir, if I call a lamb's tail its leg, how many legs will it have?".
The man answered "Five."
"No, it will still have four", replied Mr. Lincoln, "calling a lamb's tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."
Peter
I would say that PageRank is a pretty good way to measure the reputation of a page
GoogleGuy,
I don't see how the reputation of a page on my site has improved with my visitors because of a corresponding increase in the number of links. It only improved in the SERPS. Then while I was busy selling widgets to the leads generated from this site, someone else moved up in the SERPS because they spent the time asking for more links. And so it goes.
My point is it's still the Old West. This is an amazing time in which 2 little guys, a seller and a buyer, can completely circumnavigate monopolies, cartels, and big corporations to connect with each other for commerce, at an unprecedented level (Ebay too, but a well placed site in G has way higher upside). I have been frustrated as well lately, but I feel the love when I disconnect from my enterprise and from WebmasterWorld for 10 minutes.
Unfortunately we're hunkered down in Donner Pass right now and lots of webmasters are brandishing the eating utensils.
Unfortunately we're hunkered down in Donner Pass right now and lots of webmasters are brandishing the eating utensils.
he he...I couldn't agree more. As the buffet of Google leads and sales stagnates, I'm sharpening my knife, and getting out my A1 sauce.
LMAO!
I am now using alltheweb and am very satisfied with the results I get.
i'm also using and recommending alltheweb, and the funny thing is alltheweb is basically a google clone these days, but the old google. Theres a moral there somewhere.
I'm sure G doesn't mind losing the queries of us webmasters, who are looking solely at SERPs and don't click on Adwords.
"you don't see an employee from other SE's like MSN and Alta Vista posting on this forum trying to help us out"
Peter
If we thing of a search engine as any other site, Changes do happen. When we change things on out sites there will always be a certain amount of displeasure with our own users. The big difference with google is that are working with terrabites of data. Data that takes a lot of time to process therefore any change will take a lot longer than simply moving a few pages around.
If google are making changes to improve their search engine then, in my opinion this time in flux is worth it.
Mack.
I can make changes on the "dev" server, and those changes aren't seen by the public! They don't even know I'm upgrading my site!
Google may look into "dev" servers in the future...but it's so cutting edge that I would expect them to take at least a couple years before they adapt these "dev" servers.
Peter
I know the idea of Dev Servers is a pretty inovative idea and all :-) but it almost seems like Google is testing the results live.
Why put results live if spam and other filters are not yet installed like some have said?
It just doesn't add up.
"Google giveth and Google taketh away"
First of all, Google isn't giving us our rankings, so they can't take them away. They're not really "giving" us anything as far as our individual sites are concerned. They're taking, along with all the other pages they go out and take. They send Googlebot out and take our sites and include them in their index. Submitting is nothing more than a request for inclusion - they still have to come by and take.
What they are making available (not giving) is the opportunity to be included in their index. Period. Nothing more. And that is not taken away ever, the opportunity is always there as long as Googlebot is out crawling. The only time that opportunity is not available is when a site is removed - and that is usually the the responsibility of a site owner who failed to meet the conditions for inclusion. In those cases Google is not taking anything away - they didn't *give* anything in the first place. They are simply exercising their option of no longer taking the site and putting it into their database.
We are the ones giving - giving them the web pages by putting them up on the web. As far as rankings go, they don't "give" rankings. The web pages we give them are indexed according to their formula according to their concept of what presents the best relevancy for their users. If we optimize sites well, they are not giving us our rankings, we are giving them optimized pages and taking advantage of the fact that we know how to interpret how they measure relevancy - all of us, to varying degrees.
Google gives nothing and takes nothing away. We are the ones who give. And we are the ones who take. We do the taking in terms of benefits, income and profit if we've given them a quality site. It's all on our end - our opportunity and our responsibility.
Each time this topic comes up, there are a few people like victor who point out the fact that every webmaster has the power to stand up and refuse to let Google use their content.
But what never seems to come out of the discussion is any concrete strategy for launching a webmaster revoultion against Google.
Everyone seems to understand that an individual webmaster banning Googlebot in protest is a fairly worthless symbolic act. However, what about a collective organized, grassroots campaign to get all the thousands of independent webmasters who provide their quality content to Google to stand up and "Just Say No"?
I think such an effort could have a serious impact.
So rather than continue to complain about all the problems, I suggest we spend our time planning the revolution.
Step 1. Select a new homepage Everyone reading this thread who believes that Google has too much control over the web must select a new homepage for your computer. (My choice will be Teoma). Everyone must also agree to completely stop using Google.
Step 2. Robots.txt exclusion Everyone must add the following to their robots.txt file:
User-agent: Googlebot
Disallow: /
This is the toughest part because in order for it to be effective, it must be done by webmasters who currently receive good traffic from Google. (remember, revolution always requires sacrifice)
Step 3. PR campaign The first thing we will need is a new website to function as the home for the revolution. I'm willing to donate my przero.com domain to the cause. And I'm hoping we can get DigitalGhost to handle writing the copy.
Once we have przero.com up and running, we can launch a press campaign. Within a few days, we should be able to get few hundred copies of a mediocre Cnet story distributed across the web.
Everyone will aslo need to put up a page on their site that explains the issues and encourages visitors to particiapte in a Google boycott.
Step 4. Linking campaign The first place we will request a link from is [google-watch.org[...] (although we will not reciprocate the link until Mr. Brandt complies with our robots.txt exclusion position)
Once these items have been put in place, the general public will begin to understand that searching at Google will mean that they might not ever see the best sites on the web for their particular query. That will cause them to migrate to a new engine, and that migration will inturn restore economic balance to the web.
I'm ready to do my part. Anyone else?
We need a good logo and a catchy slogan. Helps to have something nice to look at while you're stuffin' yer money where yer mouth is.
Vive la revolucion!
We all know what Joe Surfer searches for - "google.com" is #3 and "www.google.com" is #7 or something close. Have links from our sites to ATW, Teoma, ... with anchor text "google.com" and "www.google.com" or even "google."
In your capacity as an editor were you tasked with crafting descriptive titles, using headers for logical subdivisions of text, maintaining the theme of the copy, keeping the copy consistent and adding "continued on page 108"? ;)
Actually, that's the kind of optimization that has Google's blessing. I doubt seriously that the SEOs whose clients' sites have dropped from 1st to 300th in Google's search results are being punished for using descriptive page titles, headlines, or anchor text--or for writing copy that relates to the page's topic.
Sound like an idea?
Peter
Okay, you own a business. Your choice is to make a profit or loose money. Google chooses to make a profit.
Now, you are a savvy business person. What would you choose?
1) Creating a company where you get to set your own rules and make a profit, or
2)Create a company to lose money while someone else makes the rules for you?
Please don't waste our time on your foolishness. You want to make a profit, don't you? Or if you are giving away money, send me some, Mr. Gates!
Google does what it does because it believes it perceives a profit from the actions it takes. No business, including google, cannot be everything to everyone.
My 2 cents.
WFN
[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 10:07 pm (utc) on June 3, 2003]
[edit reason] Rudeness Removed [/edit]
User-agent: Googlebot
Disallow: /
This is the toughest part because in order for it to be effective, it must be done by webmasters who currently receive good traffic from Google. (remember, revolution always requires sacrifice)"
Now if you revolutionaries can just convince my competitors to do this I'll be eternally grateful.
And by the way, what's the point? What would you end up proving - a few hundred pages drop out from webmasters who are already complaining that their sites have dropped in ranking. Do you honestly beleive that any one with a site on the first page would pay any attention to this lunacy. Or is all of this one big joke and I'm just missing it?
Also, I have my private secret list of two companies with highest ROI... and Google is #1. And tonight I'll move G at position #15...even at #93... and then after each update I'll move G at different positions...let them feel it themselves...
