Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
[google.com...]
However no action was taken and site is happily #1 still.
Why Google doesn't hear spam reports?
What can you do in that case?
Smug comments like ...If you are getting beat by hidden.text and doorway pages - you really suck at optimization
don't help anyone.
BeeDeeDubbleU I disagree, which is why I quoted it the comment. :-)
If a site above yours has some hidden text, it would be there if the text wasn't hidden. So, if someone is worried because they are "getting beat by hidden text and doorway pages", then I suggest they look for other possibilities.
If just one person who's read Chris's comment has stopped worrying about whether sites above them have hidden text, and has instead added some content to their site, looked at their page design or encouraged some other webmasters to link to them then fantastic. I happen to know that more than one webmaster has done just that.
The fact is that Google tells everyone what is not allowed, they seek people to submit reports when they see spammers, then they go on allowing it. That is the real issue.
Google don't tell me what is allowed on my site, they decide whether to list me in their site. The difference is crucial.
When a webmaster realises this, and turns their mind from worrying about whether they agree with Google's choices and instead focused on what they can do to help Google to like their pages, they will benefit.
Why ask people to waste their time submitting spam reports when they can do nothing about them?
The tool is not there as a mechanism for users to remove sites they don't like. It's there as a mechanism to alert Google to potential problems. If they see something that needs action, they'll deal with it but that threshold may be far higher than you'd like. It isn't my choice or your choice as to how much manual intervention Google wish to apply.
Google use the submitted URLs to help develop their software. They want to make their search engine as good as possible at helping people finding what they want. This is more important to them than whether you or I think that some site ahead ours mine shouldn't be.
luckychucky, I don't see that Google would be likely to inform someone who used the spam report tool. It just isn't there for the submitter.
I don't see that Google would be likely to inform someone who used the spam report tool. It just isn't there for the submitter.Then why are we there for Google?
Comments like the last two from adminstrators are what keep many of us from posting more. Here was an honest question that has been dismissed and ridiculed by the powers here, making assumptions about everything from the poster's SEO skills to his honesty.
read more and post less, it gets better results
Some people are 'there for Google' (in terms of helping identify sites for qualitiy review) because they want to help Google build a better engine.So we're volunteering as an unpaid focus group, as survey-takers and watchdogs for this multibilliondollar corporation out of the goodness of our hearts, because we love the Google project so very much. We give to Google for free, because Google's wonderful and deserves it.
Comments like the last two from adminstrators are what keep many of us from posting more.
Good
because maybe just maybe these two adminstrators do know what they are talking about and for once in your life listen to good advice because that is what they are trying to give
but your not listening!
Pardon me! I thought forums existed for discussion.
P.S.
I was listening. I don't object to the content of their replies, just the tone.
[edited by: metrostang at 5:13 pm (utc) on Feb. 24, 2005]
If a site above yours has some hidden text, it would be there if the text wasn't hidden.
CIML, clearly you are much more knowledgeable than me but I think I would dispute this. Hidden text that is being read by the robots is content the same as any other content and content is king.
Google don't tell me what is allowed on my site, they decide whether to list me in their site.
Agreed, but I made no allusion to this. I said quite clearly that "Google tells everyone what is not allowed." This was clearly in reference to their search engine not your website.
Google use the submitted URLs to help develop their software. They want to make their search engine as good as possible at helping people finding what they want. This is more important to them than whether you or I think that some site ahead ours mine shouldn't be.
The site I mentioned is not a concern to me. My client's site beats the **** out of most others in its targeted area. I just happened to notice the spammers site sitting directly above it for a single, very specific search phrase and I wondered how he had got there.
Rather than discussion, some people would rather we just search and read the same old information posted before. Which is fine as well. But then it wouldn't be a forum. It would be a content site of old posts. If we didn't keep discussing some things over and over, the information would get old and no one would be here and this site wouldn't be high ranked and respected. It would be replaced by another forum where discussion was always happening and active. It's that double edged sword.
We give to Google for free, because Google's wonderful and deserves it.
Or not. It's up to us.
Just like it's up to the people who've volunteered to translate. Personally I haven't (I don't know any non-English languages well enough I'm ashamed to say), but I think it's great that so many people have.
If someone did choose to do some volunteer translating for Google, I don't think they would get to insist how their work is used though.
BeeDeeDubbleU, content is king, but hiding it doesn't give it any extra weight. If the webmaster above does unhide their text, then the owners of the site below get no benefit - in fact quite the opposite as the site above may be less likely to be penalised.
Google don't tell me what is allowed on my site, they decide whether to list me in their site.
Agreed, but I made no allusion to this. I said quite clearly that "Google tells everyone what is not allowed." This was clearly in reference to their search engine not your website.
But are we talking about whether Google allow something or not, or are we talking about whether Google choose to list a site, or at what position on their results pages? Either way, there's not much point us bemoaning their choices as webmasters. At least no benefit, unlike plenty of other things we can do.
adamxcl, I hope you're not implying I'd use hidden text. Frankly, I'd be embarrassed. :-)
adamxcl, I hope you're not implying I'd use hidden text. Frankly, I'd be embarrassed. :-)
And there you have it, BeeDeeDubbleU and others. Chris_R's old quote should be updated to say:
If you are a webmaster using hidden text to rank, you suck at optimisation. If you are being beaten by a webmaster using hidden text, you suck more.
Honestly, read some of what the more experienced posters are saying here. That doesn't mean that any other opinions are worthless, just that there is a wealth of experience and knowledge on this forum that you would be foolish (in the extreme) to ignore.
And if you are obsessing about single-page optimisation in the form of hidden text, then you need to read and understand more about the industry.
If you are a webmaster using hidden text to rank, you suck at optimisation. If you are being beaten by a webmaster using hidden text, you suck more.
Listen! This thread was never about "being beaten" by the spammers.
With respect, Brett introduced that in message #2 and in this case clouded the issue. The thread was about Google's inability to deal with spam reports so why are we getting het up about other issues?
The use of hidden text gives people the opportunity to increase their keyword density through the use of repetitive text that would not read properly if it were visible. This is it - plain and simple.
I think most of us would accept that Keyword density is still a factor in SERPs so hidden text provides an advantage, however small, to those who use it, or as Google advises ...
"Think about the words users would type to find your pages, and make sure that your site actually includes those words within it. "
The case I'm taliking about is:
A layer containing true visible text using keywords AND hidden behind, H1 text with CSS style: white which justs hides the second text because the background color of that page is white too. The repeated keywords (invisible due to that cheat) seems to add weight to positioning.
That site ranks extremely well even when no backlinks are detected.
It's H1 on top of page and hidden text combination seems to make the spammers site rank good.
However and the point is: Google didn't take action at all, the site is there (it was reported 3 times in different periods and from different places)
And the site has over 40 link in DMOZ, (reported to but no action taken) most of these are DEEPLINKS, yes they are.
So what can do really do about it?
Ok I will take care of my own sites but, what happens with that fraud?
In my opinion the site has relevant contents, BUT they are still cheating... so why should they take first position that way?
Indeed, and the view has been posted that spam reports are not there only to 'deal with' specific Web sites, but to help Google learn to build a better engine.
BeeDeeDubbleU if you don't like that view then fine, the view exists nonetheless.
silverbytes:
> However and the point is: Google didn't take action at all...
Exactly. You've helped Google by alerting them to a type of potential problem in their index, but although the spam report might result in a page being removed if the case is especially egregious, we should not assume that it will get someone else's page removed - that's up to Google.
> So what can do really do about it?
The best thing is to let Google worry about that page (or not, after all it's their engine) while you do something more positive.
In other words, it was the report that was in error - not Google.
> So what can do really do about it?
Webmasters need to take care of their own domains - same goes for Google.
Spend energies working up new quality content and leave the search business to the search engines.
Go to sleep asking yourself : What if I loose all my search engine rankings by morning?
> It's H1 on top of page and hidden text
> combination seems to make the spammers site rank good.
Who says? There has been some evidence on and off the last year that Google was sandboxing H1 laiden sites below pr5.
Anyway - hats off for a great thread starter!
After a few years here and a few thousand posts most members come around to that right :) view. Sod the algos. Don't bother helping Google with spam reports. Do your own stuff and be strong enough to not have to suck up to Google for the power of the traffic it can send you (because that can disappear overnight for even the best of sites).
Loyalty is a good quality but loyalty to an SE (which is basically an algo that doesn't give a damn) isn't very clever. It doesn't care about your "help" in submitting the spam report (it probably dumped it), it doesn't care about having the best sites at the top, it doesn't care about quality. No, it doesn't. It cares about balancing the perception of quality that users have... with the number of actual users ...with the money all that translates to. They sit there working out what % of spammy sites they can get away with without losing market share. Then they decide what type of spam to use within that "allowance" and how it can make them money. They have meetings to work out scratch my back arrangements with other big players (you think the new toolbar converting ISBNs to Amazon links was a coincidence?). SEs are not cute teddy bears.
Wake up!
silverbytes, hidden text is just not very important, but if a domain has it, it likely also uses similarly blatant spam tactics. Google acts on spam reports all the time, either algorithmically or more rarely specifically. Use them or don't. It won't cost you a limb either way.
It must be us common folk just don't understand the complexities of SEO. It's easier to see the other side of any argument when the other's tone isn't condescending.
Ever heard the cliche- 'never go into business with a friend or relative..'
It works for me. :)
Again, so called "hidden text" is not a huge issue to a search engine. 95% of it is innocent, but 95% of those who scream "hidden" text...are not.
Q: [Webmasters] What are the big things I shouldn't do that will decrease my rankings on Google?
A: In no particular order:
- invisible text, invisible links.
so either hidden text is a big deal or it isn't. or it was now it's not. people who use it are good. people report it bad. showing one thing to users another to search engines is bad or good if your site is one of the chosen. I don't understand this thread at all.
But over those four years I've taken away some valuable core beliefs. One of them is expressed by the "suck" quote - but I can see how some people may perceive that to be antagonistic and aggressive.
So instead I'll post a quote from Brett from October 2001 which also addresses the issue. The thread is still in my "flagged" collection. If you take something from it, fine, if you don't, also fine - but I found it a valuable wake-up call and quote it in that spirit:
Search Engine Optimization is:
The adjustment of html page entities and content for the express purpose of ranking higher on search engines. eg: Search Engine Optimization is the manipulation of search engine rankings systems.<snip>
I'm sorry, I thought you knew.
The adjustment of html page entities and content for the express purpose of ranking higher on search engines.
Gotta make the most of what you have, if labeling a few things, putting up a meaningful title and making sure you link your pages in a sensible manner make your site appear page 1 instead of 10 whats the problem.
eg: Search Engine Optimization is the manipulation of search engine rankings systems.
search engine controls the ranking system not me. Some forms of optimization take advantage of aspects of the ranking system but they don't manipulate it.
once everyone uses the techniques to make best use of their site the ranking system has to be manipulated by the engine if the results of it are not what is desired.
#1 site cheating happily in Goolge, why?
Gotta make the most of what you have, if labeling a few things, putting up a meaningful title and making sure you link your pages in a sensible manner make your site appear page 1 instead of 10 whats the problem.
Nope, that's what you tell your confessor or your god or your conscience in the wee small hours of the morning when you are arguing about your ethical points score. I did it because it was a meaningful title. I linked my pages because it was sensible that way.
But here - in a community of search engine optimisers - you are reading this thread because you want your site to rank higher and you do the things you do for precisely that reason. End of story.
I started my ecommerse site about five years ago with an informational site about my business, but soon realized that selling on line was the way to go. I never gave a thought to search engines, just built the site trying to avoid the things that irrated me, and along the way had my bricks customers try it out and I'd fix what was confusing to them. I simply wrote the descriptions, titles, etc to reflect what the pages were about.
Double digit monthly growth told me to keep doing the same until the February 2004 update. That's when I found out how much I depended on Google. The site vanished, so I starting researching and found this forum.
Knowledge gained here enabled me to analyze my site and others in my sector to determine why the site dropped and what to do to correct the problem. Much of that was from postings by Brett, europeforvisitors and others.
I appreciate the time and effort many here take to answer some pretty basic questions and have always admired the patience and respect shown in most reponses. That's why some of the responses in this thread surprised and I quess irritated me.
Back to SEO. Until last February, SEO were just three letters in the alphabet to me. After reading here for a solid week night and day, I started looking at the code of the sites that were still ranking in my area. What I found wasn't pretty. Hidden CSS tables, hidden text, nonsense paragraphs written just for the SE, doorway pages and what I call doorway bait and switch pages (sites not offering what they were obviously SEO'ed to rank for).
Since then, I continue to write pages for the customer and solicit their feedback, but SEO is always in the back of my mind. I have made changes to the site specifically for the SE's, as most have, but try to make those changes benefit the customer.
If it were just about who can write the best text and most user friendly site, then SEO wouldn't play a role. That's not the case, so do we try to manipulate the search results? Yes, but there are ethical and unethical practices used and everyone knows the difference.
I quess if you define SEO the way Brett did, then we all wear a black hat or at least a grey on.
Nope, that's what you tell your confessor or your god or your conscience in the wee small hours of the morning when you are arguing about your ethical points score.
No I don't have any guilt about any of my sites. Thats what you do.
I did it because it was a meaningful title. I linked my pages because it was sensible that way.
No thats what I did.
But here - in a community of search engine optimisers - you are reading this thread because you want your site to rank higher and you do the things you do for precisely that reason. End of story.
No thats why You are here, I am here for the community spirit, and the latest developments in the google ranking system to ensure my sites rank where they should.
This spam thread is pretty educational I have to say, I've started thinking the same about the division, which is pretty fake, between the different hat colors in SEO, it's like has been noted, all the effort to get better position in the serps using whatever strategy you're comfortable with in terms of the risks taken. I know google isn't my friend, I've known that for a while, but they make an OK business partner as long as you cover your a##...
