Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
This is just odd.
The 64.* DC's return about 300 pages from my site.
The 216.* DC's return about 46,000 pages from my site.
And the 66.* return 69,000 pages from my site.
Currently I have about 65,000 pages.
If I go to google.co.uk I get 46,000 pages. If I go to google.com from my US based server I get the same 46,000 results.
It is all very odd and confusing.
[edited by: tedster at 9:56 pm (utc) on Jan. 30, 2006]
I'm not sure this is BD rolling out - maybe its another effect all together.
On that point, I entirely agree, unless someone can give me specifics to the contrary, as I see NO BD Update started, NO rollout of BD, NO specific/drastic changes in the data bases.
MC says one thing, and some of the posts on here say another. He said that the BD DC's would spread one at a time every 10 days or so, until full integration around mid March.
So, where is all this Welcome to Big Daddy Update coming from? If I am wrong then I apologise, but to me it seems irrational until proven.
Yesterday, a new set began to propagate that has my site at #1 with the url only listing and now that set of results has taken over as the non BigDaddy results.
Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Look around you will see others reporting the same thing on other forums.
As far as BigDaddy spreading, that's reseller's opinion. If you check this thread, he says that Welcome to BigDaddy every five days or so. I'm not sure why he does it, maybe just to get you guys going. He knows exactly what Matt said and a quick check on the Mc tool proves him wrong.
One of the reasons you might not notice this update is because maybe you weren't affected during the September 22nd update - I was. About 6:00 on Friday, I was looking at my logs an noticed a lot of traffic from Google. I checked and sure enough, I was ranking on phrases that I hadn't ranked on since September.
some filters have been lifted/applied/tweaked in the last 24 hours on certain dcs.
BD has and is continuing to propogate to other DCs.
fluctuations in "results returned" are quite big, similar to those pre-update.
good luck to all over the next few weeks!
I certainly don't see anyone else reporting a Bag Daddy Update.
If you are referring to changes in the SERP's, then yes, I agree, there have been some, but to make such statements as 'BD Update'as if it were happening this weekend, when there is no such thing, is in my view, misleading.
Brett and WebmasterWorld normally name updates. But this is neither an update nor a data refresh; this is new infrastructure. It should be much more subtle/gentle than an update.
So let's not use the "U" word, it just confuses things. Let the rest of the Internet be confused if it needs to be -- let's work for clarity here.
My site was first hit for non-www/www on 11th June 2005. In September it took a final nose-dive.
Only just now can I see improvements in the 11th June problem.
The delay fits with rolling out a major new infrastructure across a massive network, bugs and glitches always pop up in the most unexpected places once the stuff goes live. Obviously new infrastructure means new servers, and maybe new data handling components on the network end, maybe that dark fiber stuff google bought for example?
I see very little difference on quality content oriented sites I do, currently I'm not tracking heavily seoed sites anymore because I'm sick of that game, so I don't have a real sense of where those types of sites are in bigdaddy. But seoed sites, that's definitely a question for people who play that game, I'm sure it varies widely depending on niche, competition, and so on, and of course on what seo google found in jagger, and is currently allowing to come through into the standard serps. This is only, of course, my opinion, but if your site dipped in one or more of the jagger phases, I would be very nervous about the future of that site, even if it recovered later.
Anyway, onward with the DC watching, in the finest tradition of cervantes.
I created a backup plan "site" a year+ and oops this sandbox stuff hits it's finally out of the sandbox on BD.
Google drops sites for no reason and many self employed human lives go down the drain.
If Google want's to treat webmasters websites like stock market prices then there needs to be a watchdog group created to put pressure on Google to prevent it.
First time I react on this forum though I watched with great interest ...
I agree 100% with you, Google are playing with us!
We have to do something about it....
Here's an idea....stop relying on free traffic to make a living. Google doesn't owe anyone a thing (and I speak as someone who has had high-profit, 5+ year old site MIA in google for 7 months now).
Not to get this thread too off track, but I learned the hard way (as you should) that relying on free traffic, especially considering the wild-swings even a slight tweak in google's algo can bring, is a sure way to go broke.
As for big-daddy....there seems to be a "few" things fixed in terms of some of our URLs/supplementals, but (I hope) they are far from finished. It will be interesting to see the overall effect on traffic BD has once it's finally installed on all datacenters.
once you do it and get your ferrari, write a book and metion my nickname in it :P
Cutts! tell us about these two cases!
Personally I still like the game though, I'll take free serps as long as I can get them, just takes more work than most want to put out I think.
back on topic, I still like big daddy, only changes I see in my areas is that my sites rank better now than they did on the first big daddy drafts, almost identical to non big daddy now dc's now from what I can see.
google is an ad company, keep it clear, a media thing. For profit. If you can get them to play nice with your site, great, if not, web fusion is right as far as I'm concerned. If you can't get google to play, see if you can figure out why, some sites do fine, some don't, there are common threads that connect the ones that do and the ones that don't I think.
My God, you have *really* messed up this time... I mean, if I were to report every single site.. I'd be typing until the morning...
Duplicate sites, hidden links, hidden text, same companies with different domains but same content dominating top 10 results... the lot!
I can kind of see what you were trying to do here, but it ain't working. Sorry. Linking schemes now work much better than ever... So much for cross-linking with on-topic sites...
Is there an Undo button you can click? Is there a phone number I can call?
I guess not. I guess those of us that have played fair till now will have to resort to the tactics of those that have just been elevated to positions they wouldn't have dreamt of before.
Let me guess: A few domains, preferably with the keywords in the domain name. Just a few links to them, from about anywhere, just so you find them (PageRank is as good as dead now). Large sites, but that's easy -- let's just recycle other people's content (move a few paragraphs around and stuff). *Definitely* outgoing links to on-topic sites -- how about feeding Yahoo's search results to Google?
Whatever, have fun, it's your Google after all.
Seems so to me.
Dropped pages have reappeared with good TBPR.
Pages that were climbing have reverted back in SERPs and TBPR.
Some caches that were current (new every 2 weeks) are back old date (3 months or more), though some are current (last 4 days).
Maybe bringing in BD datacenters that was using old data for testing proposes and will refresh on the fly.
A couple things I am noticing here that might be worth mentioning:
What Jagger rolled out, it semmed that semantic values were segregated more, ie blue widget sites did not rank as well as before for red widgets.
What I am finding is that there is more semantic spread from what I am seeing my server logs.
I am finding that Google is now placing my static rebuilt pages ahead of dupe dynamic pages in the site: search, and sending the dynamic ones to the back of the line. Since the dynamic pages were not linked from any signifcant page in the static schema, it would seem google on some of my sites is beginning to evaluate which dupe page is more valuable?
joined:June 11, 2005
You simply can't rely on Google for anything ... Free business, good results or even a good investment these days ;-)
Instead of reliving the pain and anguish of the past 12 months, I would advise anyone with the means to build a real business, in the real world, with no reliance upon search engines for trade ... to do so immediately.
Too many of us waited too long last year and wasted our lives doing so. Please learn from our mistakes.
All the Best