Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
Forum Moderators: open
One favors directories, et al, while the other is more anchor text weighted.
But get this, that home page is for freeware. The download ratio to hits is almost exactly 50% - in other words people who've found the site have found it highly relevant.
Well, the percentage of traffic from Google has been falling for some time for me. I guess that for one product, traffic from Google is going to fall to zero soon.
If Google is working within designed parameters, then the designed parameters are wrong.
now its completly gone (somthing like #340) and the #1 spot is the DMOZ page that points to my SITE?!?!?! The rest of the top 8 spots are all pages that link to my site using "my sites title" as the link text.
This happened about 11 days ago.
I figured I was being punnished for SOMTHING, but I have no idea what. I did remove some outbound links to a few High PR sites becasue they were no longer relevant. I don't think that would cause such a large change in the listing position becasue it still has good relevant backlinks and there is no competition for the 3 word site title.
That's impossible since "nothin major" is going on! :)
When you sees pages going from #2 to out of the top 100, you have to wonder if this is just some new data coming in, particularly in uncompetetive areas where huge backlink flux is unlikely. Anyway, it's pretty interesting to look at :)
Having been thrown to the wastelands for the most obvious two word search automatic widget, I find that if I throw in a third keyword I'm typically top 5 again (even #1).
Of course, there's not really any such thing as a UOP, its just another loose wheel rattling on the crazy Google rollercoaster.
Yeah I think this comment is closer to the truth. This doesn't feel like a real update, and GG said as much. More like a big backlink update or something of that sort. Also, as someone else noted, sometimes when you see G revert to old cache pages, it's a sign that data is about to be updated, and some of our pages are showing much older versions in the caches than we saw just a couple of weeks ago. FWIW.
This is not a big deal to me - I can laugh about it - but it's a sad indictment of the world's most popular (and supposedly best) search engine.
However, I shall wait to see if these results percolate into the main index before sending a sarcastic email to Google.
I've previously posted that 'info' page positions don't move much in the serps. I stand corrected.
I've just searched a medical condition - and the G results are very poor, very poor indeed. The top 5 results have all been copied from the same source. I'd like to see the 'real' source' - but I guess that because it is a niche authority site it is at about page 1000. Crap results Google.
p.s. The Serps were so poor I used the Google directory -and exactly the same blood-sucking, empty content, re-directing sites were there too.
Unfortunately, it seems the update is just getting worst.
Whoever is their team leader for their new scoring system, he or she should look at the serp once in a while ;) and not just some half cooked formula.
I do see variance also on www - same sites in the top 10 compared to www2 - just in slightly different order.
Has anyone seen the results appearing on www2 appear on any results when querying www2 - I haven't.
The reference to this thread from the home page confuses the issue somewhat: "False Alarm".
There used to be significance when www2 differed from www but in the post DomEsmeFlorAuBrandy era is this still the case?