Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
I realize that many of the list items would logically just be a perceived "signal of quality" reversed but if we all dig down into our experience then this exercise just might bring up a few unique and useful insights. Here's a start:
25 Signals of Crap
I'm not claiming any of these are definitely a signal of crap, but they make my list of possibilities based on my own conversations and observation.
Please add/subtract/modify and let's see if we can find a new perspective and learn something.
I don't think anyone mentioned having the words "under construction" on a page. Especially if it's accompanied by a nice animated GIF of a guy with a shovel.
Aaaaaaaaah do they still exist, I haven't seen them for ages .. :) Maybe the guy that made that gif has retreated to a buddhist monastry in shame ...
Copyright date isn't a sign of crap. It is a sign that the page was written on the year of the copyright. Updating the copyright date each year is silly of the page content has not chnanged.
In many cases, the copyright date is displayed in a running footer, so the current year will be shown regardless of when the page was written. Also, the entire site may be protected by a "compilation copyright." Look at any newspaper site, for example, and you'll see a "Copyright 2007 [Name of Newspaper]" notice on every page, even though the content on some pages is copyrighted by syndicates, contributors, wire services, etc. and archived articles may be from 2006 or earlier.
So I change my copyright notice to 2007 and then find someone copied it in 2006, so now I am the thief. As pages have a server date or last modified stamp right (sorry if terminology is wrong)?
Google isn't going to rely on copyright notices or (date of last updating) to determine which of two sites' versions of a text block is older. It will rely on the data in its own index.