Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Over and done with?
All done all through?
By the time jagger "settles" it will be old news. The ingredients of the stew are what matter if you want to understand it at all, not the finished product. We already know something else is cooking for a few months from now. Don't be one of those "wha happened" folks who drop in weeks or even months too late.
That's hilarious! From what I have read in this forum, there has yet to be anything posted that will have any bearing on the actions I may or may not take with my sites.
You guys have not figured out what the "ingredients" are! LOL! You guys post your ditties exclaiming you have it figured out and then a page later your theorys get blown out of the water.
You guys are creating your own stew!
How many people here printed the source code of the top 30 sites in each keyword of interest before Jagger executed?
Because, that's a key "ingredient" of the stew.
For me, I'll wait until J3 settles and print out the same top 30.
Then I'll compare the two and do an anaysis.
Gee, what could be more simple?
But, you guys didn't do that, did you? You doing the guess-by-golly game.
Players of that game get the consellation prize ... position #50!
I've created two more websites over the past week.
Oh, dear... I've only managed one, and that's still in test. There must be someting wrong with me.
>>It was food for thought when Matt Cutts posted it over a week ago. I, for one, had read the post and digested the same at that time. <<
With all due respect, I really thought that you meant it when you wrote "and digested"..
Then I read your other lines
>>Once I hear J3 is fully propogated, I'll do my analysis. So far, I like what I see.<<
And can see that you haven't digested much. Sorry ;-)
Its obvious that two of your finest assets are arrogance and ignorance. Many people on here are not very knowledgeable, and read the forum to learn things. Other people offer help and assistance wherever possible.
Spending your time copying the top 30 sites codes, for each and every keyword you follow, could also be seen as a dumb way of passing your time.
If nothing else, perhaps you could learn to be more tolerant, and less aggressive , or better still, keep out of the forum.
Also, to judge everyone on here in such an underhanded manner, and as 'one' rather than individuals, only tells me you need to finish your education, and get a life!
(and yes I know I spelt 'superior' wrong - I just wanted to give you a quick thrill)
Yet again, we see the aged non relevent sites back at the top for the search term with loads of useless directory sites filling out the serps at the top with them.
If those results have taken this long to arrive at all of this will have been a standing joke.
Time will tell i guess.
Its a funny update this one, a couple of weeks ago i was thinking results in 7 look great, very relevent to the search term, now its anyones guess what the end results will be like
As far as copying source codes goes, what do you expect to find there? That the vast majority of sites have not made any changes during the update? And of the ones that did, do you think that your analysis will amount to anything more than a guess anyway? I doubt it.
He has actually suggested a "tool" to work with. I'm a newb and this big long thread does nothing for me. I don't have the time for it...just popped in because it floated to the top again. (I haven't read it either).
I guess this thread helps somebody somehow. Thanks Brad Stevens for offering something constructive.
I'm at a loss,
Gerard
You are completely missing the boat here! I'd be looking for sites that DID NOT make any changes to thier source code during Jagger.
It is those sites that I will compare their pre-jagger rankings and their post-pagger rankings. Then, for those sites that have gained rankings, I will compare source code to see commonality as to why they may have increased rankings. I will do the same for those sites that have decreased in rankings.
As well, I keep a spreadsheet of other factors regarding my competitors (backlinks, etc.). That information will obviously also enter into my analysis.
Indeed, I will be able to use hard copy *FACTS* to begin to determine why rankings have changed ... not just guesses.
You guys are completely guessing without using FACTS. Your just guessing why rankings have changed. And, I have yet to hear one person provide highly salient information ... other than information that any decent webmaster already knows anyway.
I'm sorry for being such an @ss here ... really, I am. But, gees, you guys amaze me! You guys do not seem to apply logic to the problem at hand. You don't seem to have any basis of understanding from which to apply an analysis matrix.
And, to those who are already trying to alter their sites to gain rankings, well, I really do not know what to say except that is the most stupid thing a webmaster could do at this juncture.
Wait till it happens folks. Then, apply logic to find commonalities. That gives you answers. Then adjust your sites and wait and see what happens.
Patience is truly a virture when it comes to being a decent webmaster!
Nonetheless, in my corner of the woods, J3 does reflect fairly accurately the actual rise and fall in popularity of the websites I watch.
Some high-quality, newer sites continue to be stuck in an officially non-existent sandbox.
http://66.102.9.104 is the worst thing Ive seen in a long time. So much spam, I just can not belive it.
The mega spammer is now away on search for a biological cell component over me and moved with another word meaning "count [as in nobility] of the Reich" to one below me ...
Cloaking seems to be the technique of choice as neither the keyword nor the apparent content [one adsense block and an anim gif imitating a header and about 20 links to himelf imitating a menu] have ANYTHING to do with a cell ... :\ ..
Maybe jagger concentrated too much on pure commercial spam and educational sites ... get hit and spam there escapes ..
It's also in another language than english ... :\
I really wonder if this "spam update" is valid in all languages.
What thread are you reading. Posting such silliness helps no one.
On the other hand, *THE SOURCE CODE*... my goodness, if that is your level of understanding then the other silliness may be your finest hour.
I really admire your enthusiasm.
You have good intentions, but you have very long way to go in terms of understanding serps.
Your methods could help you understand msn but are not going to give you a clear understanding of google or yahoo.
However it will be a good learning experience.
Trying a new/old civil approach that we use to use : )
Type in miserable failure and see what you get. Yeah ... big deal.
There's more to the picture than just links. That is why I keep the (already aformentioned) spreadsheet of information that contains that and more.
Good grief ... do you people even read the posts here?
You people have absolutely nothing recorded pre-jagger, do you? You have absolutely nothing to compare post jagger to other than your former rankings.
How absolutely sad.
You are right, data it is very important and each source of data is important in itself.
There are many types of data that needs to be analyzed, i.e. on page and off page. Each interacts.
I believe Googleguy has termed these as "signals".
How many signals are out there are unknown to those that are not insiders.
Even the engineers learn from our observations. The sandbox is one gold example.
Hope you post some good data to when you are done.
[edited by: minnapple at 2:38 am (utc) on Nov. 18, 2005]
That is ... until the next set of hyperbole gets rolling ... then it's off hopping down another road of theory.
Shoot, I've even read posts from one user who continually trys to tell us what Matt Cutts *really* means when he makes a post. I keep wondering if the guy is wearing a turbin and pearing in a glass ball! <chuckle> The guy's hyperbole has been proven wrong countless times, but yet he keeps posting enough that people start buying into the crap again. Good grief!
How can any true analysis be completed without a baselne of information? And, that baseline of information needs to contain more than just your sites. It needs to contain information about what's happening at the top ... ALL of it. That gets you the big picture ... not just a microcasm of our small little worlds.
After a while, you learn to skim quickly through reams of waste paper to find something that either warrants further investigation or lends some credibility to what you assume.
Sadly, if you looking for anything else in any large forum today, either public or by paid membership, you will be dissappointed.
Real information is shared in the "private clubs".
To be clear, I am not talking about some other group within WebmasterWorld.
BradStevens,
Cool down man. You have made some very interesting posts. So too have the crap writers. We can learn from each other. I just learned from you that links is not everything and learned things from the crap writers too. Put them together and what have you got? (a tanked site haha)
Any port in a storm. Ever heard the saying?
Updates such as this causes hysteria, uncontrollable emotion, and in some cases, the symptoms can be much worse.
LOL. A bit strong Brad, even if it is close to the truth. That's not everyone in here though, so you deserve what you got!
It's been really slow-going over the past few days, so I guess thanks are in order -- for livening things up, that is :))
But there is far more than the source code. Just wanted you to know that.
Say do you remember the serial wedge and trumpet?
Hmmmmmm,
Anybody have any suggestions how I can keep my source code hidden from Brad and the belligerent minnapple?
.
[edited by: Great_Scott at 3:11 am (utc) on Nov. 18, 2005]
[edited by: minnapple at 3:12 am (utc) on Nov. 18, 2005]
You have absolutely nothing to compare post jagger to other than your former rankings.What else would we need?
As well, I keep a spreadsheet of other factors regarding my competitors (backlinks, etc.).Where do you get this data?
Have your studies led you to believe that calling people stupid will improve your rankings?
