Cache/PR/Supplemental nightmare ending?

Last time I saw this we got back in to the serps

[travelin cat]

When I last saw this, about a week later we finally crawled of the supp hell that many people have been talking about.

For the past week or so, we have gone supplemental again and we have seen very old cache dates with snapshots of 14-18 month old pages, now we see this:

Your search - cache:KIQtme1UhmsJ:www.#*$!.com/page.html - did not match any documents.

The rest of the page was blank... could this be a sign that Google is ready to post fresh results?

[steveb]

This also happened last week, but then the ancient caches reappeared this weekend.

I wish it was a sign, but I think it is just another sign Google is screwed up. The nightmare will only be over when it is over. Hopefully we will live that long.

[travelin cat]

Steve, I'd like to think that their engineers are running around pulling their hair out trying to correct this, at least I wouldn't be the only one doing it....

[draxofavalon]

Steve, I'd like to think that their engineers are running around pulling their hair out trying to correct this, at least I wouldn't be the only one doing it....

I think the same... they dont really care... Matt Cutts looks like he haves no news about this problem... he said NOTHING about all the site that had traffic drop... I sent a mail to Google three days ago and no response yet... its just a waiting game.

[texasville]

Been a lot of talk about this in the forums here.
Here is just one example:
[webmasterworld.com...]

[ZoltanTheBold]

I think the same... they dont really care... Matt Cutts looks like he haves no news about this problem... he said NOTHING about all the site that had traffic drop...

Isn't there a deeper issue here we should be exploring (loudly, if possible), namely Google's utter contempt for communication?

Whilst we probably all agree Google don't exist to keep SEOs and webmasters happy, we do provide the content. Upon which they make money from advertising...etc, etc.

Ok, it's an old arguement, but in the light of 4 months of second-rate tinkering with live data (anyone else find this a little galling?), isn't it time they addressed at least some of the issues raised in a more formal manner?

If you picked a company worth $billions in any other industry, and someone told you all they really used to communicate was an employees blog, you'd just laugh.

I can't be the only webmaster sticking to the rules fed up of being treated like a potential data terrorist.

Before I'm flamed - I am well aware the big G need do nothing. They'll go rolling along with or without us. Still, it sticks in your throat. Watching them tell the world how technically superior they are, whilst watching them not handle 301s.

[steveb]

"running around pulling their hair out trying to correct this"

After two plus years they are long out of hair.

They are just doing what they are doing. If they could have fixed this by now, and not had some other thing be worse, they would have.

[smokeybarnable]

i'm almost glad it happened..as it has forced me to look at other ways to generate traffic and exposure. I was relying way too much on google before.

[smokeybarnable]

but it is pathetic that google thinks zero communication with webmasters is acceptable. Also, I'm not impressed with matt cutts at all. He doesn't seem to grasp what is going on. Also, the google guy that posts here occasionally saying everything will be alright doesn't do anything for me either.

[draxofavalon]

GoogleGuy and Matt Cutts its the same guy... am I wrong?