Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: mademetop
I recently got a site indexed that is getting hits for some really dreadful phrases to do with 'little boys'.
It's a gift site, a clean one, but I use the word "sexy" to describle some of the products.
I think I might spend an hour writing a little php script to redirect these searchers to a "f* off" message.
Anyone else experience this kind of thing?
The other night, I had requests for a 6 word search phrase across many SE's numerous times.
I read something the other day about a company using random search terms to determine relevancy in Google. (sorry, cant remember the URL)
They stuck out in the logs like a sore thumb. If you got these requests a few days ago it could be thee same thing.
Ranking well for an unrelated search phrase is almost as bad as not ranking at all. I ended up with loads of adult sites adding their url to my directory. ended up having to send out loads or "site rejected" emails... it was fun :)
I gave this a little thought whilst doing my shopping and would suggest that you forward the log entry to the police. I know Scotland Yard have a sqaud to deal with this sort of thing. Personally I would not hesistate. They may be able to get somewhere with the IP etc, they do have a lot of manpower/tecnology to invistigate child por#.
It is quite amazing what some people will search for, I have seen some wiered stuff not only in logs but also on-site search terms databases. Let us just say I am no longer shocked.
However, from a professional point of view, some research in this area can be useful in preparing yourself for what may come your way, and also in taking preventative measures beforehand.
There is a blog type site that documents not only the strange search requests people make, but also the times that search engine just plain get it wrong. It is called Disturbing Search Requests. Quite interesting reading although I have to warn members that it is totally uncensored which is why I have refrained from linking to it for obvious reasons. I think I am walking the fine line as it is. You will find it quite easily by searching on the above phrase.
Also, just a note to all, please lets watch our language when discussing this, even with oblique references. Many Thanks
Basically it's this:
Any 'bad phrase' in the query string of the referrer get's redirected to a page that print's in huge letters
I searched for blah blah blah on www.searchengine.com
That page will reload itself on opening and on closing into a new window in a continuous loop.
I hope it crashes their computer!
Why go to such hassle to tick someone off when you could just do nothing... All you are acheiving is crashing browsers of people who are carying out legitamite searches. The main problem is the text you have used to attract traffic. The traffic you are getting have been mislead by you!
I thought you where just refering to people doing "legal adult" searches
I had a similar situation a few months ago. I printed off the section of my log file and handed it in at my local police office. I also enclosed a list of the searches that had been made from that specific ip address. The officer in question didnt have a clue what I was talking about so got me to write a letter so show to who ever he inteneded on sending the info to.
We also get some entertaining searches on words relating to toilet training. And less-entertaining searches for combinations of "testicles" plus "crushing" or "maiming", which find an article on the abuse of institutionalized people.
The only thing I can do is shrug and think, "Well, I educated some more perverts today!"
The child aspect you have is more disturbing. It really might be worth re-writing your pages to eliminate the "attractive nuisance" phrases, when you consider that there are some people you don't want buying children's gifts from you, if you take my meaning...
Anyone else experience this kind of thing?
Yep. Posted a while back in the keywords group about an acronym I had tried to promote heavily in the SEs, that returned some ... errrr .... interesting search terms. In the end, I think our new web designer chose to stop promoting the term. At least, I notice we no longer rank well for it, anyway. :)
If you can call the main branch of the local police force and ask for the computer crime person you may make headway with this information and make an interesting contact. My mate did alot of interesting things and had contacts over several countries, all doing the same sort of work. Unfortuantely, there was always more work than they could handle.
And yes, they did nail people :)
I mean, what harm does it do, if someone is searching for say... "giant ridable rubber duckies" ... and they come to your site, for whatever reason. Chances are, if you're not "servicing" that unique "niche", they'll turn around and leave. No harm, no foul.
Imposing your sense of decency on others, is more a desperate grasp at your being "wholesome" than a true desire to actually help others. If you're genuinly concerned with young boys being plundered, consider being proactive and actually doing something about it in your community.
That´s what went through my mind when I first read this threat.
added: Not sure whether this was a freudian slip or not. But I was referring to this thread and not this threat as I wrote above.
[edited by: andreasfriedrich at 5:28 pm (utc) on Sep. 19, 2002]
No use making it a crusade and wasting valuable time on someone who doesn't even matter to your site.
maybe they'll buy a gift for their "rubber ducky" while they're there. ;)
There are currently 190 member states in the UN [un.org] plus Taiwan and Vatican City. Each state is sovereign and it´s up to its legislation to determine what constitutes cp. And even within a single state there is considerable quarrel as to what constitutes cp. It´s a difficult matter and as such it is not prone to simple answers.
"Her *ude body was found a day later alongside a mountain highway between Orange County and Lake Elsinore. Investigators said she had been *exually assaulted and asphyxiated."
"Barragon also testified [concerning *hild *orn evidence in a previous child assault case against Avila] that Avila would spend long hours surfing the Internet and conversing in chat rooms."
Personally, Nick_W, I think you're doing a pretty stand-up thing.