Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
What I am most interested in is why cant search engines tell the site owners if there is a penalty that is causing them to drop overnight 75% in search results.
Issue on this thread
1) What started this - A big drop in SERPS on April 26, 06 all terms went from page 1 to page 4 on Google SERPS.
2) Thread was closed on Webmasterworld, I understand why so lets stay on topic here.
3) Focus is why can't Google tell webmasters/public/the planet when and why there is or is not a penalty?
Yes telling people these things can promote even more SEO manipulations so what to do?
Search engines need to find ways to communicate with their content providers, us... webmasters, users, companies, organizations and all others. What is the best way?
The search engines need to make it clear if someone has crossed the line. We have to (suggested at least) submit sitemaps, we have to watch for hidden text, submit wrong doings on site re-inclusions when in many cases the starting point is adhering to a search engine disclaimer and admitting we did something wrong before we even begin writing our questions or issues. Imagine if our court system was set up this way?
Re-Inclusion Requests, is this a start? Admit guilt then discuss, so you lost before you started. What is this telling younger folks.
Let's keep the discussions open and democratic and make some headway webmasters, users and the general good public.
Can we please find a way to report direct to content owners proper status on sites, issues, why or why not a penalty, etc. (its a good thing)
What do you all think is right/best? Good ideas please.
Hollywood
Clearly Google hopes to commnicate more -- in quite recent times we're seeing notifications through the Sitemaps program and the occasional warning email to the webmaster/owner, when an email address can be found. I think both these programs stand a chance of improving the feedback. Also, clearly, Google must guard against giving away their "secret sauce".
Also, historically, our very own GoogleGuy was the first such "official" outreach to webmasters from a major search engine that I know of. And Matt Cutts began attending PubCon many years back, at this point. Of course, this is not going to conquer the scale problem if personalized feedback is what someone wants.
Telling you when a ban occurs is one thing, but telling you when and why your page (which page?) fell 40 positions (which keywords should they monitor?) would be a huge undertaking, and is not really their core mission.
Then there's the complexity of the algorithm itself. By telling you "your page ran up against a filter that does xyz" they really would be giving away the secret sauce, over time.
What I think is best is an expansion of the Sitemaps program feedback. That's the vehicle that might stand a chance of scaling. It also assures Google of a working communication channel in every case. Bu a drop of a few pages is probably not something that they even can or want to report on.
We are absolutely set on communicating more.
Some of it will be in person at conferences and other events. Some of it will be through e-mail.
But this alone doesn't scale. Millions of sites, millions of Webmasters -- many of whom aren't contactable at anything as simple as "Webmaster@example.com." And seemingly millions of conferences :O
I think the world of our Sitemaps team; look at how much they've added (in tools and information) just over the last few months. And believe me, they aren't sitting still.
Which is good, because there's a lot more to do. Google can and will get better at communicating.
[webmasterworld.com...]
I still wonder if there's room for a paid service for 1 on 1 communication, later, when and if these trials are successful per this thread :
Personally, i hope it works so that the quality of communication can improve between webmasters and with Google, eliminating a lot of the BS with facts.
How you handle a reasonable level of service, I don't know, but what I'm seeing is the need to provide webmasters with good "open" support first. Paid support doesn't need much effort if the honesty and communication is working well, i think.
I'm also seeing that, for whatever reason, the webmaster community could be forgiven for thinking they are not getting straight answers to straight questions from Google. This is n't personal of anyone.
Webmasters could also be getting the impression that sometimes spokespersons, such as Matt are not getting a straight line of info within Google. [ Again - nothing personal ] :)
Malfunctioning page indexing is clearly one of them.
Therefore: Malfunctioning backlinks [ IBL ]is another.
Therfore: Malfunctioning results
How on earth are webmasters supposed to accept the notion of IBL alterations as being the reason for changes is beyond my belief.
Many forum readers [ here and elsewhere ] have provided months of evidence that things are not working and if Google wants webmasters to trust them, a declaration about "listening" would be so much appreciated if it was supported by some honesty on the issues so broadly referred to - in particular some very influential forum members that have respect for being accurate in their observations.
If this is handled properly, you may not have much scaling to worry about.
"I have a problem with X and Y and I have done A, B and C as recommended on your webmaster guidelines."
and then three days later receive a reply that is either a cut and paste job that bears no resemblence to the question that was asked, or says something like "Please read our webmaster guidelines, and perhaps you could try A, B, and C first."
You really want to respond with something like "Err, I already tried them. Didn't you read my frikkin' question?"
Results with Google have been 50:50 either way. Not one direct query has been satisfactorily resolved at any time in the last 2 years. It was as if they had simply read every tenth word of the question and then pulled a random reply from the answer bank as a response, and called it a good job if at least two words in the reply matched the words of the original question.
Kinda frustrating that you employ all these helpers that are no help whatsoever.
These canned replies to skilled webmasters are of no use. I think the system of communicating lacks credibility.
This current instability have gone on for almost 5 months, and preceeding issues as outlined above for almost 2 years. This needs big improvement.
At the higher level of contact, whilst not wishing to be offensive, the answers coming back seem to selectively ignore "critical" issues or say things which just don't stack up. So again, webmasters would be forgiven for saying this also lacks credibility.
If Google is going to create an improved image over it's search with users it needs to listen and respond professionaly in a manner which can be believed and seen.
Sometime's seeing is believing and talk means nothing when nothing happens.
is not lettting any page from the given domain rank higher than many external pages linking to it
"Google can and will get better at communicating."
Amen!
These canned replies to skilled webmasters are of no use. I think the system of communicating lacks credibility.
What is especially frustrating is that this 'dialogue' with the automatons can go on for some time. In each post after they suggest you read a webmaster helpfile, you get invited to let them know if and when you make changes to your site. Whether you do make a change or just reply with a related comment you still get the same automaton reply .. and on it goes..
