Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Update Jagger, Google Update Oct 18th, 2005

When can we expect a new PR update?

         

jretzer

5:33 pm on Oct 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Continued from here:
[webmasterworld.com...]



Anyone have any guesses as to when we can expect a new systemwide PR update?

shri

3:37 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I wish Brett had called this the "Rolling" update. Taken so long .. just when you thought it was over, something new happens.

Yippee

3:38 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



"Matt Cutts a Stinky One"

texasville

3:43 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Well...here's a little something...there is a site that is always #1 or #2 in my sector. They are an old site. In dmoz for quite a while.
They have hidden text...white lettering on white background via css. They have their outgoing links on front page all pointing to a 1x1 pixel transparent gif. They have their products display and listings and pics and then several pages of use and safety of the product scraped directly from a canadian gov't site.
I have reported them three times by googles webmaster spam report. Last time with the gilligan update in subject as GG asked.
I figured that google is living up to their saying they don't do hand to hand spam or blackhat fighting. I figured they might just get hammered in the next update.
Well..BINGO! They have dropped all the way to #3. Way to go Google! That's filters at their best!

Webmeister

3:45 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I hear a lot of people talking about one-way linking, creating new content, proper internal linking, whitehat SEO as opposed to blackhat tactics, etc. We all spend a lot of time learning what it takes to get up the ranks in Google. These are strategies that webmasters have figured out the hard way. Then, once we figure them out - we get deranked by an update like Jagger that is supposed to be curbing spam. Yet, most of the spam remains.

The fact is, Google doesn't want anyone to be able to "manipulate" the search engine listings - so they don't make it very clear what it takes to get to the top. Unfortunately, there are not really any legitimate ways to make it to the top of very profitable and popular phrases without first figuring out how to climb the ranks and then second - doing it (which is "manipulation" any way you look at it). Here's the first definition that comes up when you lookup "manipulate":

To move, arrange, operate, or control by the hands or by mechanical means, especially in a skillful manner.

Can anyone name one webmaster who hasn't achieved a number-one ranking under a high-traffic search phrase without doing this? I can't. As a matter of fact, this is the way you can climb to the top in any business or organization. Those who don't learn the system end up stuck at the bottom where there is less risk involved.

Guys like me don't have the big corporate bank accounts, so we have to learn the system the hard way and then try to compete with millions of other webmasters along with the big corporate websites. Without learning the tricks of the trade, I would still be lost at the bottom of the search results. Did Google tell me how to get there? No. But when I did finally get there, now I get bumped by the big corporations that don't even know what the term SEO means.

I know that Google needs to curb spam. But a lot of the sites that lost out so far in Jagger were not spammers. They were the hardworking webmasters who frequent these forums. They are the developers who live and breathe to hear the next words that come out of GoogleGuy's mouth, and then they act on them. For the most part they are willing to offer content, whitehat linking, and great-looking sites that comply with Google's guidelines. I can only hope that when the sky that *didn't fall yet* is lifted back off of them that we can find some kind of recovery from this catastrophe.

If Google wants to start curbing spam, they should start with those crappy sites that are created solely for the purpose of making money off of AdSense ads. Most of them are filled with useless links and worthless content, and they fill pages and pages of search results on tens of thousands of phrases. Google has created this spammy nuisance and allowed it to thrive. Whatever happened to cleaning out your own house first? Removing these sites would clear out at least 25% of the spam in the Google index (but would also put a dent in Google's wallet).

Let's just hope that this update reverses itself at least in part. If not, this place will become like a nest of mad hornets.

[edited by: Webmeister at 3:52 am (utc) on Oct. 19, 2005]

Hollywood

3:46 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I agree with followgreg
-------
"One question about the sandbox:
Isn't it a clear demonstration that Google is so unsure of their algorithm that they have to put up a penalty on new sites.

If they knew how to filter good vs bad/spammy sites they would not have to do hat right? It would not make any sense. "
-------

100% Agree, if this sticks (new algo change) then Google has trouble, I know this is said many times during changes to the Algo but I have been in the SEO buis for a long while (Since Google first became a steadily used SE).. these results are bad...

I have researched some recent polls and it does not look good for the future of Google as far as good results for people searching the last 12 months... looks very bad actually. Google has created its own monster thanks to AdSense and they know it.

The worst part is the way the new Google staff (Now, IMO not the real ole Google boys/gals, Brin Etc, real minds) is trying to pinch the pockets of the world using the Adwords routine.. it is now all about pleasing the investors and messing with the numbers, figures etc and joining the country club, the BS buss, etc.

Google is now an official overpriced stock IMO, Google is now a Corp. waste with a confusion of leadership and how to really provide a value for the people that use it. It just aint there anymore the way I see it and the research and stats I look at. It be a mess folks in the making, investors should really do their homework.

Note: for those investor/management bigwigs that understand TA (technical Analysis) well GOOG just did a double top head and shoulders formation IMO, now it be time to come down to earth. If people also do not like the SERPS well... it be time to get the ball rolling in the wrong direction fast.

Time to see how they will survive against the real Algo team Yahoo has created.. so far it looks like Yahoo has a big spurt soon in activity from what I hear and see. Google stock will soon balance itself in reality, you heard it here first. (Smiling)

Hollywood

PS - I hope they get this cleaned up and this is a test of something that wont be stikin' (For a lot of us)

Pirates

3:49 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)



Just thinking about the name of update "Jagger" and how appropriate his songs are:

Jumping Jack Flash = This Update
Time is on my side = Patient content seo's
19th Nervous Breakdown = Seo still recovering florida.
Back to Zero = Seo's just got penalised
Can I get a witness = Seo suspects hijacking
Can't you hear me knocking = Frustrated Seo in Sandbox
Casino Boogie = A link X you got paid for
Chantily Lace = Every seo dream

Webmeister

3:54 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Just thinking about the name of update "Jagger" and how appropriate his songs are.

You forgot the song that most aptly depicts what this update has done to thousands of hard-working webmasters with legitimate websites:

"Shattered"

Pirates

3:59 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)



To tell truth I am bored of this game now. If google want to appoint authority links I am tired of arguing.
So google you won won't defend any listings. Well done.

[edited by: Pirates at 4:08 am (utc) on Oct. 19, 2005]

shri

4:05 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Posted by RobinL

>> We're #3 for our term on MSN and #10 on Yahoo, and 17th on Google, and I believe it's because of this age factor.

You've NOT been hit by this update. 17 is a pretty decent position to build on -- it definately implies that you've not been filtered or had an algorithmic penalty applied to you. It just implies that you need a little bit more on page, on site and off site clean up / actions to do.

texasville

4:12 am on Oct 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I agree with Hollywood. Google needs to clean it's own house. But that takes an honest business. Won't happen. They need cash flow too much. Been spending money like a drunken sailor in port for the first time in six months.
This 930 message thread spans 93 pages: 930