Why does the 'Google Lag' exist?

Trying to understand its purpose.

[bakedjake]

I had some in-depth discussion this weekend with some friends about the sandbox. Every theory on how to beat it kept coming back to one central problem - no one is sure why it exists.

I feel very strongly that until we have a good grasp on why it exists, it will be very hard to beat.

I don't buy the explanation that it's intended to be a method of stopping spam. Why? One, there's too much collateral damage it is doing. Two, if you accept the 80/20 principle (20% of spammers are doing 80% of the spamming), and you realize that there are multiple ways already of beating the sandbox that all of those spammers are aware of, it doesn't make sense anymore.

So, why does the sandbox exist?

The most obvious effect of the sandbox is that it prevents new domains (not pages) from ranking for any relatively competitive term. So, start thinking like a search engine - what would be the benefit of this?

[cabbie]

>>>i'm disappointed in you cabbie. you can do better than this.<<

Sorry,I will try to be funnier next time.:(

>>>tell me what facts you are refering to <<<

Just the fact that if the site has pr and shows up in the backlinks, the site is not on the sandbox.
There's enough experienced webmasters here experiencing the contrary.

>>> and let's have an intellectual discussion.<<

Please don't.
This is one of the few boards i have any cred left and i don't want to lose it.

[renee]

>>I'd pretty much go with what mfishy says

do you also believe the supplemental index does not exist?

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

Before xmas? More like after xmas, this has been going since February this year!

[mfishy]

<<supplemental index does not exist?>>

I never said this. But, given your capabilities, I would not expect you to have understood this. I stated that the supplemental index has ZERO to do with this thread. Actually, if you take out your ramblings, it is not mentioned at all.

Understand sweetie?

The sandbox/google lag/whatever is a ranking, not an indexing issue. It is absolutely critical to understand that.

Re-read that please.

[renee]

>>Actually, your entire theory is based on a premise of a supplemental index that you have 0 proof exists.

cabbie, this is what you said earlier.

[renee]

sorry cabbie, i meant fishy

[isitreal]

<<<Actually, your entire theory is based on a premise of a supplemental index that you have 0 proof exists.

While you didn't actually say that it doesn't exist, this statement would indicate to most readers that this is exactly what you meant, so if you mean something different, then maybe you should be more clear, I also read you to be saying this.

So I'd say your words, even if they aren't what you meant, are saying what they were read to be saying. Why is everyone getting so snappy, the full moon isn't close? No matter what is happening you can't do s#$t about it at the moment, all you can do is try to pool your knowledge and get it figured out. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't make you brilliant and them an idiot.

<added>LOL, we both posted the same quote at the same time....

<added>Understand sweetie?....

mfishy, this style doesn't help at all, it doesn't make you look good, whatever the merit of your points, this type of tone does not make your point more convincing, quite the contrary.

[mfishy]

Errr...darn it, looks like I won't be convincing anyone!

I later stated that the supplemental/imaginary index filled with sandboxed sites does not exist, get it? If you knew how sites are beating the sandbox, you might understand why this theory has no merit at all.

<<No matter what is happening you can't do s#$t about it at the moment>>

Of course I can. I rank sites as fast as ever, it's just the roundabout way that one must take that is annoying and perplexing.

[isitreal]

Ok, Mfishy, then I simply cannot understand what you are talking about.

<<<
<<<supplemental index does not exist?>>

I never said this. But, given your capabilities,
>>>>

<<<<I later stated that the supplemental/imaginary index filled with sandboxed sites does not exist, get it?>>>>>

So are you saying you said it doesn't exist or that you never said it doesn't exist, make up your mind, try to be at least slightly coherent here, it sounds like you have some kind of interesting thing to say, but you aren't saying it, for whatever reason you have.

<<<<<it's just the roundabout way that one must take

is this referring to what cabbie or cavement mentioned, buying up domains with pagerank? sounds like it, I know that works, that's not a secret I think. Or is it something more interesting that actually conclusively proves that there is in fact no new site sandbox per se, in other words, a new domain name can get by it, I'm not asking for details here, that's your business, just if that's what you are saying.

[edited by: isitreal at 5:56 pm (utc) on Oct. 5, 2004]

[mfishy]

The supplemental index does exist, however, this has nothing to do with the google lag we are discussing.

from Jake

There is no such thing as a "new sandbox index". Sandboxed sites appear in the main Google index. Same as un-sandboxed sites.

<<a new domain name can get by it>>

Correct