Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Matt Said,
November 3, 2005 @ 4:21 am
Mike, J3 has less to do with spam and more to do with general indexing. Its hard for me to estimate how it might affect your site without knowing any specifics..
Especially those friends who donīt agree with me, including Dayo_UK ;-)
I wish to ask you this simple question?
Do you see the results of the followings Jaffer3 Front Troops DCs have been spreading to other DCs since this morning after the off/on incident? Yes or No!
216.239.53.99
216.239.57.99
66.102.7.99
Thanks!
I dont agree that they are Jagger3 - they may be laying some groundwork - who knows - but we know there is more to come.
Cant see them spreading - In fact they are not the same as seen at about 6am this morning AFAIK.
Cheers
Dayo
[66.102.9.104...]
64.233.161.104
66.102.11.99
<edit- same as the other results mentioned above>
just took a look at [66.102.9.104...] and did a search. After that I clicked onto the Google logo in the upper left corner and got an error - my browser tried to load
[66.102.9.104...]
Tried that on Firefox (Mac) and IE (Windows).
A nice little bug?
[edit: change xy to de - examplified too much ;-)]
[edited by: taps at 3:22 pm (utc) on Nov. 3, 2005]
If I check a product keyword, it shows two URL's as follows, one at position 12 and one at 16 in the SERP's
Category> Sub category
Category> Sub Category> Specific item
But both for the same item keyword AND item number
[edited by: Eazygoin at 3:22 pm (utc) on Nov. 3, 2005]
[66.102.9.104...]
I would say the data you are talking about is on:-
216.239.53.104
216.239.57.104
216.239.63.104
64.233.189.104
66.102.7.104
or .99 at the end - however your prefer to access them.
and for a couple of sites that suffered with Canonical url bugs - there is some encouragement - perhaps it is laying groundwork.
These are the future IMHO
Reasons:
1) No coincidence they appeared when Jag3 was suposed to appear.
2) Sites I watch are now ranking for body text and long search phrases.
3) Still not complete, hence Matt + GG comments. Many pages on my site are still being ignored but I suspect this will slowly update as more fresh data pours in.
4) They have to weed out Yahoo pages and other stuff... just general familiar old filters.
If they are changing the foundations of their index, I doubt they would be introducing massive new ranking algos as well. This was a rebuild of the systems, especially concentrating on canonical urls and supplimentals, not a serious ranking algo change. The new results look similar to a pre jagger update but hopefully with canonical fixed. However, if you have a conanical problem, you may need to wait for your sites to get spidered a few times.... just a guess.
>>Hate to tell you this, reseller, but I think the ones I predicted are actually the correct ones. Now I'm htting the same serps as my default google.
64.233.161.104
66.102.11.99 <<
What you have predicted and see on default google is Jagger2. right? unless you are telling me that Jagger3 is already on your default google!
Because the 2 DCs you mentioned donīt look like the 3 DCs Iīm talking about and call them Jagger3 Front Troops ;-)
Reseller - strarting to agree - Jagger3 Scout party perhaps.
No, these are pre-jagger DCs.
Totally different results than I had an hour ago and the past days, which was Jagger 2, I assume.
Or has billy the cat eat those as well?
Maybe the fat cat knows which DC Jagger3 is running on... :)
I hit a new high in visitors at about 9:45 am eastern. And it continues.
This DC is now changing:
64.233.161.104 - showing different results as you refresh, the other DC I mentioned, 66.102.11.99, appears stable with what I think will be very close to the new results when Jagger 3 fully rolls out on Friday.
Nope. I can find 20 keyword phrases where we were pre jagger in the top 5 and now not in the top 500 on the DC's. I can also find many phrases where we are now back after Jagger1+2. As I said, I think the serps will turn out similar to pre Jagger, this was a complete system overhaul, not a ranking update.
SEOPutte - I think you can still see bits of Jag3, not the final version.
I doubt any of these new results are live until next week.
Pre or post, I don't know, but on those, I can see 'mom and pop' pages that disappeared on main google.com now reappearing to the first-page positions where they last were on 17th October.
I was hoping that J3 would get rid of most of the spammy results and had thought it would deal with supplimental results/dup content issues. I still can't get my deleted pages off of sup results.
On the other hand I am wondering if the 'general indexing' part will bring big changes.
Dagger3?:
216.239.53.99
216.239.57.99
66.102.7.99
My site has suffered from both Canonical URLs (hello Dayo_UK) *and* Supplementals. Fixes were put in place for both in Feb-05, yet few changes until a nose-dive in Sep-22. Finally, 66.102.7.99 shows with the correct url (bliss), and is non-supplemental (ecstacy), and is in the #1 spot (with a cherry on top!).
Dayo_UK:
Mozilla though :() is going crazy 12 requests a second
On that basis,why on earth would Google make a site disappear if its using AdWords?
the two are not related or so they say. And why shouldn't they? If for instance they have a better set of results.
I can't get no satisfaction in this..
OK, ok someone had to do it ... :Ķ
the two are not related or so they say. And why shouldn't they? If for instance they have a better set of results.
spam is a relative term, and it's an ongoing battle. if you ask GG, they probably cleared lots of it already with these two updates. No one update or series of them can get rid of spam.
methinks this has something to do with how google treats supplementals or unreferenced pages (no inbound links), and /or the much-talked about cannonical issues.
Maybe how links are treated too. I personally hope that Google starts ignored ROS or fishy links INDIVIDUALLY, as suppose to devauling all links from that site. This way, if site A buys ROS links, they aren't influencing the SERPS at all, and they are still penalized (by wasting money). This would penalize the link buyer, and also prevent others from harming the competitor's sites by buying links for them.
