Forum Moderators: open
That is to say, should one be checking to see if the sites are out of the sandbox regularly or only when they know there is a major Google update? :)
Thanks
Mc
How many regular people with regular web sites have active link development programs? Do a search for "submit url" + widgets, and you will find sites from the spammy side of the tracks soliciting reciprocal links. If Google forces people to resort to solicit a specific type and quantity of links just to get their sites activated, it is encouraging SEO tactics. And, for this dubious accomplishment, it essentially sacrifices a large amount of new content. It just doesn't compute.
A whole new topic, but whatever style of site they show at the top of the serps, the spammers will replicate. Spam has been a part of business since advertising was invented. Big highstreet supermarkets 'spam' towns, car manufacturers 'spam' tv ads... etc. etc. Free listings on google will always be a target and in 50 years time people here will be complaining of spam because spam is life itself. Google will never remove spam because spam is advertising which is what google provides. Personally, I think most spam is brilliant and I wish I could do it. :)
If all new sites are sandboxed, how is an authority site ever going to find them, much less link to them?
A very important observation Vec_one.
This whole situation most certainly does not compute. Whenever Google come up with any important new feature they shout it from the rooftops. It's easy for them to do this, they don't have to pay for advertising ;) All we have had on this situation for the last nine months is a deafening silence.
Repeat after me ... this is a defect. There is no way that this is intentional.
This is a defect. There is no way that this is intentional.
This is a defect. There is no way that this is intentional.
This is a defect. There is no way that this is intentional.
...
A whole new topic, but whatever style of site they show at the top of the serps, the spammers will replicate.
And this is where MSN offers new hope...each user will have the flexibility to change the style of site that appears at the top by adjusting the filters. While MSN is still in Beta, I am certain these filters, and the way you control them, will be refined and improved.
Google offers a search based on one set of variables.
MSN allows you to change your variable set (esp. the weight of 3 variables)
Google is backed into a corner, and the sandbox is evidence of this. I have always liked Google, but I sure hope they can start to offer more control for the user, or I fear they will have a poor showing in 2005.
You have always needed a link to your site to get noticed by Google. In the past, any links in would help you rank. Now only specific links in which are on theme really help you. That stops the seo tactic of exchanging links with anyone and stops webmasters covering hundreds of sectors with pr gained in only one sector. That is surely progress?
To gain quality links in on a theme you need to start producing sites that more discerning and perhaps non seo webmasters are happy to link to. You especially have to attract one way links. This makes seo harder and brings us all down to the level of a webmaster who has no concept of seo. In otherwords, we have to rely on unsolicited links in as a result of our site content.
We all need to keep thinking as if we work for Google. In reality their solutions are often very simple and logical. The spider cannot 'read' or 'understand' websites, so it has to rely on humans who have done so and cast a vote (a link). The more discerning they can be about the links they acknowledge, the more quality they will detect.
Google has embarked on this new proceedure with a long term view. The system will not immediately produce amazing serps, but with time, only good sites will rise in the serps. Older sites, including spammy ones, are still showing. But as I said earlier, new quality sites can catch up. This will mean that eventually good sites will dominate. Spammy sites may have many good links at the moment relative to new quality sites, but their position will probably have peaked, with quality new sites continuing to rise over the next year or so.
Its a long game google are playing, which is fustrating for new quality sites. But if they hang in there, their time will come. Its all about the internet returning to the real world, where a business takes years to establish itself.
The system will not immediately produce amazing serps...
And the system only allows for one set of results, which I believe will prove to be a limiting factor as MSN offers more (sets of results).
Google is adapting to reality. In the real world business's take time to grow.... now the same is true on Google, and we are talking years not weeks like the good ol days.
Never underestimate how stupid people are when using the internet. I think this system will fail miserably because no one will understand it. Give people a choice and either they will make the wrong one or they will suspect they have made the wrong one. Eitherway they will feel uneasy and not use it.
To gain quality links in on a theme you need to start producing sites that more discerning and perhaps non seo webmasters are happy to link to. You especially have to attract one way links. This makes seo harder and brings us all down to the level of a webmaster who has no concept of seo. In otherwords, we have to rely on unsolicited links in as a result of our site content.
Mhes as Vec_one so rightly said this just does not compute. If a site is well and truly sandboxed there is no way that it can be found in order to generate these unsolicited links. This is a Catch 22 situation and it is obviously not intentional.
I have put up two or three sites with excellent content during the last few months and none of them are featuring. The owner of one these sites provided me with highly unique, useful content that anyone searching for her keywords would have been delighted to find. Google does not see it this way so Google has a problem! It is failing to find just about all the new sites, good or bad. It's broke, plain and simple.
Get the press onto this. It's the only way we'll get a solution, or perhaps more accurately a resolution.
Never underestimate how stupid people are when using the internet.
Yes, it took people a while to realize Google offered a the best search.
If that sort of logic works, then we should lock up all newborn babies until they can convince us they won't grow up to be criminals. :>)
So? You have to earn your rankings that now takes many many months... tough.
>The owner of one these sites provided me with highly unique, useful content that anyone searching for her keywords would have been delighted to find.
Good, in a few years you may be ranked well.
>Google does not see it this way so Google has a problem!
No, you have a problem. Your problem is that you think your site should be ranked highly and it isn't. Until you get enough people to agree with you and link to you then you will continue to have a problem.... this now takes time.
>It is failing to find just about all the new sites, good or bad. It's broke, plain and simple.
No, it can find them, it is now waiting for people to link to them with relevant and mature links. Google is in no rush to rank new sites highly. Its been there and done that and that is how all the spammers made a lot of money.
>Get the press onto this. It's the only way we'll get a solution, or perhaps more accurately a resolution.
The story would be like a new book shop in deepest Africa complaining that no one is giving it free advertising within months of starting. Google is just being cautious about ranking new sites... fair enough, they owe you or me nothing.
If the nephew knows that it will take sometime for his site to rank, he should buy adwords or use another advertising medium. Established sites would carry the story anyway, which is probably a better signal to google that the claims are legitimate. The nephew is really dumb to just rely on a new site via google free listings for such an important discovery.
Why on earth does Google have to take the blame for all these ridiculous scenarios? Google is just a website like yours.... I bet you don't put a google search box on every page of your site and give them free advertising. You just put stuff on which you think is good..... so do they. They've been hit with spam and are trying to deal with it, probably just as you would, with caution and not being bullied into putting up unproven new sites just because they are new.
After your lecture, i surely need to reconfirm that this forum deals with SEO ... and help people in learning as ow to rank well on serach engines like Google.
In Google'd eye anybody who do extraordinary efforts to manipulate the ranking of any website is a Criminal and as good as a Spammer.
Few years back crosslinking was not spamming, now to some extent it is...
