Forum Moderators: open
It's quite clear from reading this forum alone,
that's it's quite easy and very possible to
knock someone of the rankings who are competition.
In effect Search Engine Ranking attacks!
It's also clear, that google just have no policies regarding
this, and if someone is given a low rank, they clearly
couldn't do anything about it. Google are now so powerful, I think this is a very worrying situation.
Has anyone else had loss of ranking that could be attributed to an Attack, by a competitor or for some other reason?Google Penalize URL's on Spam Reporting Sites?
A site of mine has just disappeared off the scope (from page 2 to page 102).
..... It has been there for some time with no major changes (just info, pricing updates, etc.).
[ GrinninGordon ]Google Bomb Attack?
We also got a couple of sites banned due to a competitor signing a ton of guestbooks and listing these few sites with them to
eventually get us eliminated from their index.[ trueMarketing ]
I think CIML hit the nail on the head when he saidpeople who spend their time worrying about how to remove the sites listed above them would be better off working on their own sites.
I don't really agree. There are many instances in many sectors where the competition is worth hurting, even just a little. In these cases resources are available beyond what the average SEO could gather... big business is involved so you have to expect big business practices.
By the same vein, if I work in a very competitive industry, regardless of the fact that I never intend to act maliciously towards my competition, they may not feel so fuzzy about me. The best way to ensure I'm safe is to know my weaknesses, which, by coincidence, may also be theirs.
So some webmasters should definitely never worry for a second about removing/penalizing other sites, or having theirs removed, but some others may be in a need-to-know situation.
he wasn't talking about those people. He was talking about the folks that spend more time trying to torpedo their competition rather than work on their own sites.
[oilman]big business is involved so you have to expect big business practices.
[fiver]
I've read all the posts,and I think this is an extreme
worry, especially considering google act as thier own police force,
judge and jury.
As fiver says, you've got to expect dirty practices, especially
when it comes to big business. one word. ENRON.
I'm sure we all have a price - if some big corporate asked
somewhere here, I'm sure that person could tell them exactly
how to use google bombs and whatever, to demote the competition
in specific key words.
A google bomb used to be great, but now a google bomb
has the opposite affect, it means you break the rules and
google ban you for life. (so it seems).
I don't see it that;s hard to demote/get rid off someone by creating
a google bomb.
But, I don't see how to protect myself, unless I have full
access to the links that google has!
And checking those links - hence there must be tools or tools be created
to do this.
I'm sure that this *will* happen where competition is tough for certain keywords/markets, it certainly would be cheaper than Paying for Onclick or Adwords.
Let the wars begin!
I don't see it that;s hard to demote/get rid off someone by creating
a google bomb.
Did we decide one could? All you can do if you 'google-bomb' another persons site is get it listed better for a search term.. it's your choice if you want to make that search term a nice one or a nasty one. This technique may not even work anymore if said term isn't present on the site you're trying to bomb.
What would you do?
My comments about big business practices don't relate to google-bombs or any other such methods. I still don't believe there to be any independent, technical way to penalize a competitors site. The fact that a couple of people think they have had that happen to them doesn't convince me.
As ciml put it, through many cases, in retrospect, sabotage didn't appear to be the case.
The fact that a couple of people think they have had that happen to them doesn't convince me.
I'm convinced.
Google have now indentified google bombs, and the sites that are google bombed get chucked out.
Fact. Can be shown in google, that all the classic google bombs that people set up don't work anymore.
So, anyone here could create a google bomb (of any kind it doesn't matter) and the target domain get's banned. As long as you contruct the bomb to point to the target domain, that domain will get banned. This will happen automatically and they've clearly written code to identify and remove google bombing, google said they would keep it as it's democratic - but they don't say that anymore, probably got a phone call from Bill Gates about the google bombs set against his name.
The facts are all there.
What more convincing do you need?
I may be going out on a limb here, but
GETTING GOOGLE BOMBED WILL NOT GET YOUR SITE BANNED!
nor will participating in a google bomb.
There ARE things you can do to hurt your competitior's rankings, most of them are not worth the trouble or the cost.
I'm sure I could, however, steal the rank Joes-Shoe-Emporium (pr 5) has for 'joes shoe emporium' by putting their code on my PR 6, because there is nothing to judge the ranking on other than on-page criterion and the site's PR.
What about the anchor text of incoming links? Possibly the surrounding text of incoming links as well.
I may be going out on a limb here, but
GETTING GOOGLE BOMBED WILL NOT GET YOUR SITE BANNED!
nor will participating in a google bomb.
There ARE things you can do to hurt your competitior's rankings, most of them are not worth the trouble or the cost.
They may not get banned, but they might as
well be, so that's the same affect.
All the classic google bombs like:
"more evil than satan himself"
Don't work anymore. Microsoft were no.1 for this search
term, so for that search term, the microsoft domain
as been removed from the list of results.
Google has indentifed the google bomb, and removed
the target domain/URL.
Ok, this is not a ban, but it's the same effect.
Clearly the target domain get's demoted out of existence,
if google detects a whiff of a google bomb.
oh, nice to see big capitals, if everyone makes
statements like that we'll know how google works
in detail in no time!
That's the only explanation of why the classic
google bombs don't work, google don't like it,
and get rid of your domain in the search results!
Speaking on the style of BigDave, this is a FACT!
I'm sure if someone paid anyone enough they could contruct
a google bomb to demote a site.
we don't have any evidence of what you're saying to be true. Is microsoft.com out of google's index now because it was being bombed?
the fact that classic google bombs are no longer 'working' is true. but not 'working' does not mean the target sites are not in the index. it simply means the ranking boosts no longer exist, likely due to the bomb text not being present on the target site.
I'm sure I could, however, steal the rank Joes-Shoe-Emporium (pr 5) has for 'joes shoe emporium' by putting their code on my PR 6, because there is nothing to judge the ranking on other than on-page criterion and the site's PR.
What about the anchor text of incoming links? Possibly the surrounding text of incoming links as well.
That's what I'm saying, if the original site had any incoming links with anchor text etc. the PR 6 site would likely not outrank it. The example I'm showing is that of a non-competitive keyword where there are no other variables at work, this is the only instance where someone could outrank you by stealing your code.
If someone steals your code/content and gets more topical links than you, it's not sabotage, it's competition.
The_Subtle_Knife:
> So, anyone here could create a google bomb (of any kind it doesn't matter) and the target domain get's banned.
If anyone wants to try this out please practice on my site, I'll send the preferred link text. :-)
I suppose I could try to get the 91 sites above me banned for a particular phrase but BigDave has it, "Engine Ranking Wars" are not worth the trouble or the cost.
<added>
T_S_K, Microsoft were listed top for a phrase that they otherwise wouldn't have been listed top for. That "the microsoft domain as been removed from the list of results" is an indication that the bombing doesn't have the same affect. If you bombed them for "microsoft", "office" or "exchange" then the boost from your bombing may be ignored, but Google are not going to remove their listings for those words.
> Clearly the target domain get's demoted out of existence, if google detects a whiff of a google bomb.
The bombings you describe would be more easily be explained by "if Google detects a whiff of a google bomb, then the bomb is discounted". Demoting microsoft.com out of existence just by creating a Google bomb of any kind is fantasy.
[edited by: ciml at 5:49 pm (utc) on Mar. 4, 2003]
Don't work anymore. Microsoft were no.1 for this search
term, so for that search term, the microsoft domain
as been removed from the list of results.
so you're saying you want to link to your competition, through the competitive keyword that they rank on and that you want to rank on, in the hopes that you will link to them too much and set off a flag that gets them removed from the SERPS for that search query, so that you can move up a notch?
ok, this is when i really start to back ciml's statement about being better off adding content to your sites. which isn't a very helpful stance I know, but honestly, anybody who wants to take on one of my rankings in that way is welcome to try, I'd love to see the results... I think I'd benefit more than anyone.
See I don't think the google bomb flag is really going to be set off if the anchor text is present on the site in question. It's a hack for certain, but a somewhat logical one. I don't think you can bomb me for what I want to rank for... I recently saw a PR 9 in an industry that doesn't see many, with 30k of backlinks through a single term, all coming from major sites with decent PR. No bomb-flag.
It's a big spam backdoor, but that's why google has to employ other spam detection techniques. In the end google will want to get *your* bomb-employing sites out of the index more than the target site.
I do not think that they added the requirement that anchor text appear on the page. There are still lots of examples where you can have hits on sites that do not have the keywords anywhere on the page. They seem to have used PR of the linking page as a weighting factor on the anchor text.
You will find that very few pages over PR4 participated in the "go to hell" google bomb. But I would bet if you could get it on several PR7+ sites, it would still work.
Subtle,
Please learn what you are talking about before you post things as fact. If you do that I will not have to shout in the hopes of getting the attention of those who read your incorrect statements.
You sure changed your position quick enough on this one. The simple FACT is that companies that are getting google bombed DO NOT consider it a penalty to no longer be connected with the anchor text of the google bomb.
Google bombs only *improve* a sites ranking on their other keyphrases. Please feel free to arrange a google bom of my site to destroy me, since you obviously do not like me. In fact, you are welcome to even take my advice and get a bunch of those PR7+ pages to join the fun and see that their anchor text still counts.
I do not think that they added the requirement that anchor text appear on the page. There are still lots of examples where you can have hits on sites that do not have the keywords anywhere on the page. They seem to have used PR of the linking page as a weighting factor on the anchor text.
true, the SERPS still show sites where 'this term only appears in links pointing to the site'
but it's possible they do employ this just for a google-bomb flag. Meaning they wont go to the extreme of altering a specific listing in a specific serp if the text isn't on the page. But you're right, it's speculation, could very well be PR of the pointing page like you say (would explain that PR 9 that exists in a spammy industry... their paid for links come from 30k of pr 6 pages, now those are some resources i wish i had at hand)
The idea that the page with the highest pr is retained makes sense. From what I remember from the various Google-papers, Google crawls high-pr-pages first, though I have no idea whether pages crawled early are processed and indexed before pages crawled later.
The question is, does the age of the page/site/domain play a role? If it does, it would still be easy to take down a competitor. If my site A is ranked lower than my competitor's site B, and I got an old domain just sitting there, site C, I could duplicate site B on site C, - and bye bye.
Additionally, I'm pretty sure Google stores a "content last updated" variable (mentioned in one of the Google papers, I think). The problem: each time the owner updates the content, the date field will also be updated. If the content is copied within the same cycle (eg copied after the original content has been updated, but prior to the following deepcrawl), the date field would be identical for those two pages/sites.
And if pr plays a role, I could put a link from one of my high pr pages to site C.
Of course I have never done this or anything to take out anybody else, not even spam reporting, but I've heard several horror stories from those in the gambling sector. I have little doubt it's done regularly.
I sadly agree, it's one of the major weaknesses of Google. But it's understandable that Goggle doesn't want to store duplicate content, much less return search results with such.
Like everything else in life - they blame someone else for their problems. Either it is google's fault or their competitors fault.
These types of people going after their competitors won't be able to screw up their competitors 99 times out of 100 for the same reason they have crappy google rankings.
While I am not convinced it is impossible to screw up your competitors - it isn't easy and I doubt the time involved would be worth it (better spent making your own sites better).
You are absolutely right. The only people that I have seen come up with a way that would truly screw their competitors, are the same ones that would not be bothered to do it because they consider it much more of a challenge to build their site up right.
According to Googleguy who posts here, current policy of Google is that a site being signed to a lot of guestbooks is NOT grounds for getting a site penalized. I would hope that the above is false, given how trivial it would be to sabotage the competition, or just a site run by someone you didn't like, this way. My guess is that because of posts like the above some SEOs are believing it and signing their clients competitors to hundreds of guestbooks right at this minute. :(
But I certainly agree 99% of people interested in the dark side are never going to get anywhere.
"So, you duplicate your competitors site on your old site A. Google sees duplicate content and drops the less established site... your competitors.
This is also theft! Not only could it get you into major hot water for copyright violations, but if the site you got de-listed was a competitor's e-commerce site, he could likely sue you for damages for the resulting loss of business as well!
The bombings you describe would be more easily be explained by "if Google detects a whiff of a google bomb, then the bomb is discounted"
Exactly, so you can demote a site out of search list if you were so inclined.
That wasn't my point, the point was if someone employed dirty tactics to demote, the person who
got domoted couldn't do anything about it.
That's my point, and that's the worry, the mechanism
employed could be different - but clearly trying out all the original google bombs, e.g. The Microsoft one, it doesn't work, microsoft URL does not come up - I'm sure all the links that create the bomb are still there.
It's that fact the google have no policies for this,
and cleary are judge and jury.
I've read lot's of people complained that they got banned, who had done nothing wrong or spam like, but they could
not do anything about it.
Is that fair? Do we want one body, playing police, judge and jury?
Exactly, so you can demote a site out of search list if you were so inclined.
Correct. They are removed from the results for a search term (here is the important part) *for a term that they DO NOT want to be listed under*.
There is no penalty! The sites getting google bombed do not like that they come up with those results!
If you want to come up in the results for the phrase that you are getting bombed on, then just include that phrase on your page and the filter will *never* trigger.
Actually, a client of mine was the victim of an attack. Their site (site A) was top 10 for over a year. Their competitor had a site (site b)higher pr and then copied the exact code from site A. Google saw the duplicate content and removed the site A. Once Google ranked site B high, the competitor changed their code to hide the theft.
This attack was easily documented by looking at Google's cache for the site B. Thhe cache showed an exact copy of site A. My client's site was destroyed and still hasn't recovered. They reported the problem to Google but with no assistance.
These attacked do happen and they can destroy businesses.
Exactly we need protection strategies, I suggest using no-cache, clearly google creates a "checksum" for a page,
and if it finds the "checksum" again, it sees it as spam
and acts accordingly.
Once you've obtained a good position, people should be thinking about protecting it.
There is no penalty!
You working for google now?
I'd be assuming if you got into bad books with google,
you'd be on a blacklist or watchlist of some sorts.
It's quite clear, that it's very hard to recover from an attack, that was my point, the google bomb is one "possible" method of execution, simply lifting people's pages word for word, then removing them is another. Who know how it behaves microsoft are a big brand, google haven't exactly published how they demote when google bombs are found.
I don't think that all those PHD's have even thought.
What if this person is telling the truth? They just assume your a spammer and ban you.
So if you were inclined you could find ways to get someone banned, and they couldn't do *anything* about it.
That's the point.
> the google bomb is one "possible" method of execution
Has this been established anywhere? I've not seen any conclusion of that kind in the forum.
To be fair to Google (I don't work for them either BTW), "lifting people's pages word for word" is not a simple "search engine attack", it's theft and it triggers Google's URL merging feature to avoid duplicate listings, not a penalty.
Example:
DomainA has identical content to penalised DomainB. DomainA is PR0 too. DomainA or DomainB changes content so that it's no longer identical. DomainA is no longer PR0.
DomainA was never penalised, it was just merged in the index with DomainB when they had identical content.
> They just assume your a spammer and ban you.
Because a bunch of Web sites link to you?
I have no doubt that sites that have been google bombed are on a watch list. In fact I think it is probably part of the filter as they are likely to be targets again in the future. Targets of google bombing, big or small, are not going to be considered spammers.
I don't think that all those PHD's have even thought.
I agree, they never consider what the possible outcomes of their actions are. They spend their 80 hour weeks at work hanging out looking at the menu, and just quickly hack together the filters. That's why it took them 3 months after google bombing became popular to put up the filter, it conflicted with their soccer games.
[edited by: BigDave at 8:16 pm (utc) on Mar. 5, 2003]
To be fair to Google (I don't work for them either BTW), "lifting people's pages word for word" is not a simple "search engine attack", it's theft and it triggers Google's URL merging feature to avoid duplicate listings, not a penalty.
we are talking very dirty tactics here.
Surely you don't deny that it's possible to demote someone (using whatever method/s) and they can do nothing about it?
That's basically my point. Can we all put a vote on this?
I agree, they never consider what the possible outcomes of their actions are. They spend their 80 hour weeks at work hanging out looking at the menu, and just quickly hack together the filters. That's why it took them 3 months after google bombing became popular to put up the filter, it conflicted with their soccer games.
;-)
Therefore logically there is always a loophole that can be exploited,especially in a closed commercial system, even google, do you agree?
I don't think that Dave works for Google
No, I don't. There ain't no way that I would work in the hell hole that is silicon valley again. Now if they opened a shop in Oregon ... :)
I have dealt with some of them when they filed bug reports on some of my software. All of the people at Google that I ever dealt with were quite nice.
No, I don't. There ain't no way that I would work in the hell hole that is silicon valley again. Now if they opened a shop in Oregon ... :)
? just when I thought that's where I should be. Can you post or PM me your experiences. Yes, I'm just being plain nosey!
I have dealt with some of them when they filed bug reports on some of my software. All of the people at Google that I ever dealt with were quite nice.
Now, this would be a good opportunity to get to know them better. God, I wish I had a friend who worked in the right place in google....
I'd be their best mate if I was in your position.. but then I never follow the rules...
;-)
So I, for one, don't expect to worry about being knocked out of Google. If I do find somebody copying my site, I'll make him take down the stollen material -- and then it won't be there for Google to see anyway.
The bombings you describe would be more easily be explained by "if Google detects a whiff of a google bomb, then the bomb is discounted"
Exactly, so you can demote a site out of search list if you were so inclined.
how you do mean? If the bomb is discounted (not the domain, as you were saying) then the pages linking to the domain are what is discounted.
So if I run Fivers-widgets and rank for widgets, what exactly is it you are going to do to stop me ranking for widgets? Link to me a million times through the word widgets?
If you do what do you think will happen? You seem to think it will set off a google-bomb flag that will stop my site from ranking for the word widgets.
I disagree. I wont lose my ranking because my site is actually about widgets. If my site were about my presidential campaign, then you may succeed in getting me to rank for widgets. get what im getting at?
You could also try to get rid of fivers-widgets by copying my content and putting it up on a site that has a higher pre-established page rank. My own opinion is that google will see your content as duplicate to something it has already indexed (me) and place a new low PR value on yours. But what would happen, really? fivers-widgets likely has hundreds of backlinks from other widget sites, which your domain wont have. Do you think it will still overtake my page's ranking for widgets?
I think your site might be able to take over my page's ranking for "some very specific text string inside my content", as all google may be able to do to determine a ranking in that case is include everything with the text string and order by page rank... since there is no other relevancy measure at hand.
I feel like I've written the same point in far too many posts in this thread... hope it's not seen as duplicate content.
