Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

The Algo have changed

         

Marcos

3:18 am on Sep 29, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Google, like Bert, is pure Evil!

Now, seiously, Google has changed part of the algorithm. A catastrofic change, that has wiped out most popular sites, replacing those with spamy sites coming from, mostly, Dmoz listed link farms, and Dmoz "rotten" cats.

This is the the change:

Links from non-dmoz sites donīt count any more.

Thatīs all. You may have hundreds of links, but those links donīt count at all, unless the sites linking to you are themselves linked at Dmoz.

So, this is more ore less, in a very simplify way, how it works:

- Your site has 200 links, 2 of them from two sites listed at Dmoz.
- Mr Spammer has 5 links, the 5 of them listed at Dmoz, thanks to Mr Spammer post as a Dmoz Editor.

Mr Spammer wins. He has 5 valid links, and you only have 2. End of the game.

All the other rules are still there. Title, H1, number of keywords, and so on, they still work more or less the same. Good content? Sorry, googlebot has no criteria. Hundreds of end user "voting" you, Linking to you from personal web pages? Sorry, those donīt count any more.

All your bases belong to Dmoz. :-)

[edited by: Marcos at 4:30 am (utc) on Sep. 29, 2002]

lgn

9:37 pm on Sep 29, 2002 (gmt 0)



Im getting the impression that it is the extremely competive buisnesses that are getting hurt by the alrorithm change. If you have a thousand buisness's all using SEO techniques, and you are near the top, the smallest change would bring down the deck of cards, and you could easily find yourself several pages down in the listing.

I myself, hate competition. I choose an industry where their is little competition, and I keep a very close eye on what competition there is.

I have never used SEO techiques, but use common sense in web design, avoiding the pitfalls mention by the search engines.

Fortunately, my competitor's have not learned SEO techniques as well, as we are still #1 or #2, in our listings.

Marcos

11:33 pm on Sep 29, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



>The name of the tread was "Google is Evil !", no "The Algo have changed".
>It was supouse to be funny, in contrast with "google is
>horrible"/"Google is good" treads. Why did you change it? Just
>curious, not paranoid.

No answer yet. Well, it may not deserve one. Iīll try to figure out myself.

FlashRed

5:30 am on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



The thread title was probably changed to more accurately reflect the discussion. Perhaps you would have been more successful having used "DMOZ is Evil" :)

ciml

9:05 am on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Marcos:
> A catastrofic change, that has wiped out most popular sites...

Often, the way we feel about an event is coloured by how it affects us personally. There have been major changes before, and there will be major changes again.

The 'DMoz links count more than other links' idea has been brought up a few times. While there are obvious problems in some categories, ODP listings tend to imply that a site is of at least some substance. There's no particular reason to believe that Google wouldn't use a human edited directory to affect their search rankings.

> No answer yet.

Please refer to terms of service [webmasterworld.com] (point 25). You're welcome to contact a moderator or admin, but this is the Google News forum.

vitaplease

10:58 am on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I would wager that Dmoz is not more important than it was, its just that other links have been reevalutated.

For example;

- if internal inbound links are worth less now, it could seem DMOZ links (which are external) count for more.

- if you only had a single non-DMOZ PR7 link with anchortext favourable towards your page, it could be that ranking wise this counts less than before (this is what I found). The competition with PR4 DMOZ listings consequentially seem to turn up relatively higher.

- Linktext collecting from external sites seem to carry less weight if they are less topical. That is probably the surrounding text of the link, plus the most important texts (title/H1 etc) of the linked to page are factored in. If you had a nice motivated anchortext link from a site collecting "hotsites of the month", chances are this is factored in less. Dmoz titles and descriptions are mostly on topic and therefore could seem to count more now.

However it could be that DMOZ/ODP links count for more because Google shows both the DMOZ backlink and the Google directory backlink. But this has been the case for ages..

soapystar

11:01 am on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



sorry to veer off topic again..but im back at number 1! :)

ciml

12:20 pm on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



So basically, vitaplease, you're reminding us that we need to be careful not to jump to conclusions.

Often, two things are systematically connected without a direct cause and effect relationship.

So the relationship between ODP inclusion and rankings may be neither coincidence, nor cause and effect.

Marcos

1:41 pm on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Hi vitaplease,

>I would wager that Dmoz is not more important than it was, its just
>that other links have been reevalutated

Reevaluated. Nice word. So it is not Dmoz weight is going up, it is the others links weight are going down. Aha. Great. Whatever.

ciml,

>Often, the way we feel about an event is coloured by how it affects
>us personally.

Sure. It works both ways, by the way: +300 Dmoz editor arround this forum, someone said.

>Please refer to terms of service (point 25).

Thanks for your answer. Next time Iīll try "Google is fragantly delicious".
:)
>So the relationship between ODP inclusion and rankings may be
>neither coincidence, nor cause and effect.

Yea. Now I must convince of that all those dmoz spammer flooding the index. How should I start? Something in the line of "Dear Coprrupt Editor, your successfull take over of a number of Googleīs precius keywords, thanks to your Dmoz position, is not what you think..."
;)

mykel

4:20 pm on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I don't know what sector you're in Marcos, but in mine, a very competitive one, there were lots of DMOZ sites on top as well as ones with links from sites that themselves have DMOZ links. Now they're all gone.
The top results are occupied by sites that have a pr 5-6, but have the density of the keywords I'm looking for at 60-80%. Or sometimes sites that have the keywords once, not even together (I'm talking about a multi word phrase). In other words, irrelevant or spammy. But not those DMOZ sites you keep talking about.
Heck, I'd be happy if DMOZ were so important in my sector, because I myself have a some links from DMOZ sites, but am myself way down on page 6 (from first place).

Marcos

4:30 pm on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Hi mykel,

>I myself have a some links from DMOZ sites, but am myself way down
>on page 6 (from first place).

Do those Dmoz linked sites pointing to you have a anchor text with the keyword on it? Do the non-dmoz sites have it? What about the sites on top now, do they?

mykel

9:37 pm on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Do those Dmoz linked sites pointing to you have a anchor text with the keyword on it? Do the non-dmoz sites have it?

I must admit my site name contains keywords, so all the links have them in the anchor text.

As for the sites on top now, not all are in dmoz. I checked the backlinks for a couple of the ones that aren't in dmoz, and their backlinks don't show any dmoz sites either.
I'll sticky mail you with the search term.

zeus

10:04 pm on Sep 30, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Here add the end of update I still will say that it is the best ever for my site and the other pages that has been sorounding me the last 6 month are still in a good ranking I dont see that huge different results that you are talking about, the only thing I can see is that H1-5 text is not that big a hit any more.

zeus

This 42 message thread spans 2 pages: 42