Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
Forum Moderators: mademetop
Any others? Which ones are most dangerous?
I think what we really need to know is if sites are banned automatically, or if some sites are flagged for human review.
If sites are manually reviewed before banning them, then if they are unique and useful objects in and of themselves there shouldn't be anything to worry about.
Also, you don't get banned if you have pertainent content. Ie: you run a health/doctor website, and put 300 pages of health and wellness on YOUR site.
If you have to ask if you're stuffing keywords or using doorway pages, then you probably are. Content written for and by humans is safe.
Most search engines are using automated means to ban sites. Don't count on a human review, it's very unlikely. There are too many junk sites to make it feasible, and it's too expensive.
Most search engines are using automated means to ban sites.
Hmmm, I have to wonder about that. My understanding is that it is all hype and that most bans are manual, not automated. Imagine how many quality reports are being sent in on an hourly basis to the major search engines and directories. Assemble a team of 20-30 people who are extremely efficient at what they do and they could do some major damage during a 40 hour work week based on those spam reports.
For dark optimisation all these methods are brilliant!
I can't tell if this comment is oxymoronic or just plain moronic.
If the point in SE banning is to remove spammers from the SERPs, then obviously the collection of "don't-dos" for moral-minded webmasters will be a laundry list of exactly what the spammers do so well.
I'm not saying that there aren't any spammers here on WebmasterWorld, but at least on the surface (and I personally believe it goes deeper in 99% of us) WebmasterWorld members prefer to build good pages, using good techniques that hopefully lead to long term success and an ultimately better Web for everybody.
Content written for and by humans is safe.
This is undoubtedly true. And even moreso if pageoneresults is correct about manual banning (sounds reasonable to me; in fact, sounds like a great job, too. They should offer the work out on a day-by-day volunteer basis. You get one 8hr day where you go through a stack of quality reports and kick out all the spammers you can find. Talk about cathartic!)
Things that will get you banned:
1- 3rd level domain tricks. Be far the easiest to get banned with.
2- excessive keywords anywhere in page text. Stuffing is easily spotted by algo.
3- inviso text. However, this is only applicable to a hand check (there is no known algo that can detect it with any sort of accuracy).
4- obvious keyword domain networks. Cross linking irregularities trigger a hand check.
5- badly done generated content (ai). (eg: fred and ethal dog saw red rover hopped down and up the great china wall cabinet of the table)
Things that WON'T get you banned:
1- cloaking. I've cloaked almost every site I've worked on for 4 years running in one form or another - never been touched.
2- Meta refresh/hidden redirects. They can't do or spot a thing (unless you are cloaking UNDER it with irrelavent kw's...then you might get narked out on it).
3- doorway pages. again, define it before calling it bogus. This very page could be described as a doorway page.