Forum Moderators: open
Instead of hidding text by making it the same colour as the background or using microdot links which are easy to detect, you can hide it behind an image! There's nearly no way a robot can detect it.
Anyone else got any techniques the robots can't easily catch?
did webmasterworld not tell you it is important that there is anchortext on a link that fit's the sites description?
so, you want to tell google you want to be found with keyword (.).
okay, behind an image, but`you need a <a href tag on the image to link to antoher site, and this link will be indexed, also the alt, beiing the pictures anchor text.
why not put the link visible with anchortext in your html?
help more then dots, yes you increase your pr, but anchor text counts also not only pr.
For those of you who are thinking of new ways to beat the Google police, try this one out
I would not worry about the robots detecting you, but about your competitors seeing it and reporting. There is no way to beat that :)
[pre]
div#hidden {
display: none;
]
[/pre]
Much simpler...
Nick
For me the risk of being caught is outweighed by the upside. I have several domians and domain "churn" is just a fact of life in my business. If I'm not on the first page I don't get customers, and it's just not possible for the small guy to be on the front page without "cheating" a little when you're competing against the big boys and their high pagerank cross-linking back scratching cronies.
I'm not too worried about my competitors reporting me. I tried to get them banned, but Google doesn't even reply to my mails. It's the robot I am scared of.
[edited by: heini at 4:49 pm (utc) on Sep. 14, 2002]
[edit reason] typo fixed [/edit]
[webmasterworld.com...]
(I can almost hear WebMonkey scrambling to remove his site URL from his profile page as quickly as possible...) ;)
and it's just not possible for the small guy to be on the front page without "cheating" a little when you're competing against the big boys
Well, I've managed to do that without cheating, but I guess some people just can't help themselves.
I also think it possible to compete effectively, I rarely cheat and acieve fairly good results across some competitive keywords...
Nick
[edited by: Nick_W at 5:11 pm (utc) on Sep. 14, 2002]
Too late. I do not envy the headache WebMonkey will have when he awakes. On the other hand, "the risk of being caught is outweighed by the upside" for him, so he made his choice.
Being caught by GoogleGuy -- Priceless! ;)
For everything else, there's The Search Engine World...
Just for the record.. You wont find any naughtiness on my sites, the only time I use display: none is to provide skip navigation links..
I figure any human google check will think that's okay ;)
Nick
ROFLMAO. Good one, GoogleGuy. While it may be foolish to try and trick Google, admitting doing so in a forum where Google employees read must make one the rightful heir to the throne of fools. ;) I sure wouldn't reveal my domains here if I were engaged in shady practices like hidden text, etc. I think the right word here is "squish".
If you want a domain to last. Don't cheat.
Fantastic! Nearly no way means that there is a way!
Some people may put spammers domains in their profile and see if anyone looks.
I'm glad you've all had a good laugh.
It'd probably make more sense to just report such direct to Google. The do have a thingy on the website for just that.
Too late. I do not envy the headache WebMonkey will have when he awakes. On the other hand, "the risk of being caught is outweighed by the upside" for him, so he made his choice.
Googleguy, I hesitate to ask this, because I appreciate immensely the fact that you frequent this place, but for the paranoid among us (ok, me), could you please clarify that statement.
Are you saying that members identified HERE* who expose themselves as using dubious techniques may garner an individual penalty? If so, does Google monitor 'all' other webmaster forums and apply individual penalties on that basis as well?
* eg, as opposed to identified through Google's examination of their own serps.
Or are you saying that dubious techniques identified through discussions like this will be added into the algo and therefore applied fairly across the board, rather than to specific sites?
As you say, if a webmaster implements a dubious technique then they have indeed made their choice... but I would like to think they have the opportunity to discuss it here and have us turn them around from a potential mistake before they are penalised just because they decided to 'share'.
I can envision WebmasterWorld turning into a shooting gallery with webmasters playing the role of conveyor-belt ducks, and all at the expense of free exchange of ideas.
ok, yes, i know i probably just need coffee.. but I had to ask
I tried to get them banned, but Google doesn't even reply to my mails.
Trying a different avenue?
Granted I would love to be #1 for our select keywords, but the only way to get to it is fairly...
It'd probably make more sense to just report such direct to Google. The do have a thingy on the website for just that.
I agree. BTW... GoogleGuy, do Googlers still check out the sites reported through the form at
/contact/spamreport.html?
I've used it lately to report a couple of sites using really stupid tricks which I though would/should not work with Google (hidden text/links and javascript redirects from keyword filled doorway pages)... I was very surprised to see those sites both ranked very high for their "optimized" keywords, so I think you might have a few issues there.
Or are you saying that dubious techniques identified through discussions like this will be added into the algo and therefore applied fairly across the board, rather than to specific sites?
With a 2-and-a-half-billion page index, I think that's the only way to go.
[edited by: Giacomo at 9:32 pm (utc) on Sep. 14, 2002]
