Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Continued from:
[webmasterworld.com...]
The same down-and-on problem here in Turkey.
But j3 goes on and off. No steady results. At least three different sets:
216.239.63.104 (I think with additional tweaks)
64.233.161.104 (still J2)
64.233.179.104 (J3)
Do you really think that anyone on here has reached such a level, whereby they would do such a thing.
Apart from which Google updates every day on things such as links. When you see a backlink update, it is merely an update for the public to see, and even then only a representative proportion of actual links. However, in reality, there is a huge amount that Google updates, which we never see, until such a time as we see a b/l or PR update.
Following your suggestion of harming competitors is a sad and extremely negative approach to etiquette.
3 months afterwards, I got my listings back. 2 weeks after this, when my incoming links were re-calculated, I was banned again.
I must state that I've never cheated, crammed keywords or went in for link exchanges ... so why else would I have got banned. Oh ... and of course google have never given me any inclination as to the reasons, no matter how much I've pleaded.
Although I fully understand your grievances, and also your anguish at people like me defending Google, when you can see no light at the end of the tunnel, I cannot see how destroying competitors can assist you in any way.
I can only speak from personal observations, and I work hard and long at building relationships with my competitors, so that we can exchange information, links, ideas, and I am sincere when I say that we work extremely well together. There is no animosity, no backstabbing and no feeling of envy.
I have read on occasion to be wary of including comepetitors in links, but the reality for me is that it does two things. Firstly, it gives my customers a choice, and they can decide who is best for them. Secondly, I believe strongly in what I am doing, and so hope my customers will see that we are the best solution for them. Thirdly, its better to have everyone on your side, than try and compete. Yes, thats in an ideal world, which we don't live in, but I think its the best way to deal with things.
Google list Yahoo and MSN in their searches. I am sure it doesn't affect them negatively, as they want to offer choice, and people realise which is the best search engine for them, at the end of the day.
You are exactly correct about poor quality of serps, and you are not alone. I read in Seth Godin's blog that in an independent blind test, 60% of users thought that both Yahoo and MSN had more relevant results. He went on to say that Google has gained their stature because of the spartan user interface they devised.
A business built on a user interface is a house of cards and I suspect that no one knows that better than our friends at Google. That's why they seem to be going in a hundred different directions at once. They are frantic to diversify to maintain their customer base.
If MSN, for example, incorporates search into their upcoming operating system in clever ways, Google's user interface will seem like old hat.
Investors are excited about Google at the moment because they see nothing but dollar signs, without having the slightest inkling about what is really transpiring in the search world. But Google knows that they are on thin ice and are looking for ways to offer more value to a fickle public.
Therefor, I think that the folks at Google are not all that concerned about search relevancy at the moment because the competition has caught up - search is too easy to replicate.
From my sector, I can see the tide slowly shifting. Through this update, we are down with some keywords but up with others. It's hard to judge because the Christmas season produces all sorts of anomalies, but it looks like our traffic has remained level and our conversions are up with Google.
But interestingly, during the middle of the day on weekdays, the traffic from MSN actually passes that of Google. That's been happening for a few weeks now and it's a new thing for us.
I 1000000000000000000000000% agree with this - but to most people they would not notice.
Also G has not been able to find stable serps for sites that have been hit by the bug since February time though.
Oh well. At least we know there is more to come for definite and that G must be working on something.
>>Oh well. At least we know there is more to come for definite and that G must be working on something.<<
I hope you are right, Dayo.
But....
Wasn't that what we wrote after allegra?
Wasn't that what we wrote again after Bourbon?
And here we are writing the same after Jagger, unfortunately.
It seems we got used to be on the recieving end of empty promisses, unfortunately.
And I wouldn't be surprised if Matt will post again next December 2006 the same "declaration".
Sorry Inigo, couldn't resist the temptations :-)
>>>Wasn't that what we wrote again after Bourbon?
>>>And here we are writing the same after Jagger, unfortunately.
>>>It seems we got used to be on the recieving end of empty promisses, unfortunately.
>>>And I wouldn't be surprised if Matt will post again next December 2006 the same "declaration".
:) No comments......... lol
>>>Wasn't that what we wrote again after Bourbon?
>>>And here we are writing the same after Jagger, unfortunately.
>>>It seems we got used to be on the recieving end of empty promisses, unfortunately.
>>>And I wouldn't be surprised if Matt will post again next December 2006 the same "declaration".
Lol - No comments too ;)
My best key phrase was #7 when I went to bed last night and then 108 when I woke up then 102 a short while later and now it's 86. Most of my keywords are wacky actually though a few are normal but the normal ones are for the most part more obscure.
Is this just some normal reindexing or abnormal reindexing or is it broken?