Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.208.187.169

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google is Goood

positive things about Google.

     
7:47 pm on Sep 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 28, 2002
posts:153
votes: 0


I am an amateur webmaster who has no commercial content or links. My sites tend to be of a specialized, informational nature. Instead of acquiring dedicated URL's, I use the free web hosting provided by my ISP's (ATT Worldnet and Road Runner). Until I found WebmasterWorld yesterday, I did not know so many people worked so hard at optimizing the search engine placement of their sites.

My pages have a Google PR from 6 to 4. I didn't even know that until last week when someone told me the only way to see PR was to use Internet Explorer with the Google Toolbar (I prefer Netscape or Mozilla). The recent Google update did not seem to affect me much. Somehow my sites tend to be near the top of relavant searches.

I track a few of my pages with a third-party tracker (Extreme). Google is clearly the best at letting searchers find good content. MSN search is just about the worst. I say that knowing that MSN ranks me higher on some things than Google -- too high, and uselessly. I feel bad when someone looking for information about fire insurance finds a page of mine talking about life insurance.

If my livelihood depended on search results, then I would probably be more sympathetic to the complaints about shifting rules concerning PR and SEO. From my actual vantage point as webmaster and user, I feel they are doing a great job. (Their image search should include PNG images, though.)

-- Rich Franzen

1:29 pm on Sept 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 2, 2002
posts:374
votes: 0


Do it hagstrom!
and in 48 hours you can be #1 in all SE's for vestigand!
Now if you could just think of something to sell:
"Impress the heck out of your latin speaking friends with our 100% yakswool Vestigand sweatshirt"?
6:42 pm on Sept 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 18, 2001
posts:397
votes: 0


I'm rarely one to jusp on the "rant bandwagon", but when Napoleon said..

Is it a great idea to start pointing fingers at each other? Could it be that Google has just raised quite a bit of poor quality to the top... and now they want webmasters to help them identify it?

I just had to pipe up.

It is obvious that Google re-arranged things this month.

IMHO, Googles relevant search results have seriously declined.

This is not the same Search Engine that I told all of my friends and colleagues about.

The Spam Report is used by folks who are sick and tired of useless junk filling the SERPs. Fair enough.

After a barrage of angry rants about the most recent Google update, our solution is to use the Spam Report to flush out the "offenders"?

Why?

Why must we fix the errors, omissions, problem websites and spammers?

I'm not only a webmaster, but an avid Google user and supporter.

GoogleGuy, with all due respect, I don't think the Spam Report is going to fix this mess.

Thanks for listening.

- Chad

Sasquatch

6:45 pm on Oct 1, 2002 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Gilmit,

Do you have any suggestions for what they should do to replace it?

I have no idea if they gave DMOZ more power, or if it is just an artifact of changes in the algo this month, but I am not thrilled with the lack of response I have gotten from DMOZ.

Google does need someplace with lots of links to start their crawl. Theoretically, all the submissions to DMOZ have been reviewed by a human, so they should get s slight boost for that.

Is there any other free directory that could replace it? On the commercial end there is yahoo, but that doesn't do much for those of us with nonprofit sites. Then again, absentee DMOZ editors don't do much either.

6:48 pm on Oct 1, 2002 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 30, 2002
posts:25
votes: 0


I second Gilmit.

I have two absolutely legitimate sites that I'm very proud of and they are listed and ranked in the first 3 on Yahoo. They were also in the top 3 on Google with PR=6 till 9-29.

However, I cannot get them listed on DMOZ for a year already. After 9-29 Google moved these sites down to many pages.

At the same time other sites with lower PR and poor contents are on the front page. All of them are listed in DMOZ.

BTW, some of the sites that are now on the first Google page are not listed in Yahoo! directories.

7:02 pm on Oct 1, 2002 (gmt 0)

New User

joined:Sept 25, 2002
posts:11
votes: 0


Do you have any suggestions for what they should do to replace it?

No, I don't think they should put "any" emphasis on dmoz, yahoo, busines.com, looksmart or any other directory for that matter. All that should matter is the "content" of the page - period. Whether it is listed in any other directory is pretty much irrelevant and here is why: 1) dmoz problems have been explained earlier - if a site is listed in dmoz, it does not mean it is good and it does not mean anything at all 2) if a site is listed in yahoo, looksmart, business.com etc., then it was either listed way back in 1999 or it is a paid listing. Again, it does not mean anthing - if you pay them they will list (yes they will, they don't have any editorial standards anymore which they used to have for unpaid sites). So, again because a site is listed there it does not mean anything.

Hence, why place an importance on any of these large directories? If a site is listed in one of those large directories, then that should be treated like any other external link form another page for the sake of pagerank all that. That is my opinion.

7:14 am on Oct 2, 2002 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 11, 2001
posts:2725
votes: 0


Is Google good?

I think in retrospect, I can safely say that since the economic down-turn (that started well before 11-9 - for us) our regular channels for getting business went southwards. If it wasn't for (mainly) Google finding and neatly ranking many of our very internal niche-topical pages, I would have had to fire at least two of our eight guys.

I feel arrogantly safe enough to say I will not fall into a penalty.
However I would dread the moment and day Googlebot would skip deep-spidering my page for whatever reasons (server accidentally being down for one or two days).

Can the hosting and redirect gurus help me if it would be safe or clever to have the complete site hosted twice by two totally seperate providers in different countries at the same time? ( a mirror)

This 36 message thread spans 2 pages: 36