Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
So i'm writing a paper for my marketing class so i figured a good idea would be to do some small testing to show how easy it is to generate traffic through different strategies online and one of the strategies i have in the paper is "commenting on popular website"
So i took a small blog i haven't really done anything in a while and used it as my "test dummy" since the site had virtually no traffic. I wanted to show the large increase in traffic that was possible from posting comments on popular videos with the url and doing nothing else what so ever. Everything was working as planned, i posted about 30 comments on videos with the sites plain text url using this format www.example (dot) com. (you'de think this would do nothing obviously since its just text and no search engine is going to "follow" that. So everything is going as planned and over the next 24 hours i had 250 uniques all from direct type in traffic so everything looked good for the paper ( and yes it was spamming but i didn't have ads on the site and it was for school im sorry if anyone gets mad about this)
Anyways the later that next day i realize my site has been dropped from google into the supplemental rankings i assume since it still shows up for site:www.example.tld but all of the keywords that had rankings before are gone from the first 900 plus results.
Realistically i figured it was just a chance thing since general knowledge says google wouldnt be able to read this kind of stuff and apply a penalty because of it...but i was still wondering since it was just that perfect of timing so i tried the same thing with another site that i had that i really didnt care if it was 950'd or whatever so i went about it again with a new domain.
And guess what... the EXACT same thing happened traffic spike next day site is supplemental?
It got me thinking that there could maybe be some validity to this.. i know it sounds crazy but twice in a row both with the same exact pattern? While yahoo rankings haven't changed what so ever
I keep thinking of how google owns youtube and that could possibly have an effect or possibly how the quick jump in direct traffic with low time on site from visitors had an effect since both sites had analytics installed? I'm not sure.
I know this sounds crazy i just wanted to share it with other people in case there might actually be something behind it and google some spam detection things going on that webmasters in general haven't caught on to yet, i mean in all honesty it wouldnt be hard for google to crawl youtube comments for spammed url's in common formats ( www.example (dot) com or www.example,com)
Well thats all i got and i don't have anymore "throw away" sites to test on so my testing is done but i really think there might be some validity to this even though it sounds pretty far fetched
But "something" has happened. Perhaps Google gathered your traffic details and found that you visited every page before the direct traffic came from each of them? not likely. Perhaps your sudden spike of type in traffic triggered a filter since it's unusual? Plausible but also unlikely. Perhaps you've been filtered since the traffic is all from (most likely) irrelevant content pages? Getting warmer...
It's safe to say that the "quality" of your traffic took a nosedive and that the ratio of type in traffic vs link in traffic changed dramatically. Wait a few days and see where you stand in search results, a day isn't long enough for a test.
"To disprove this idea I offer the following. If it was true we could go enter the domain name of any site we hate and they would be removed."
I don't believe that though, if you spam your site through blogs and black hat link building it will generally result in a penalty, whose to say you couldn't do these same techniques using a competitors domain?
if you spam your site through blogs and black hat link building it will generally result in a penalty,
says who? If you go back to the big link penalties, they were applied to those selling, not those buying. I have never seen this proved anywhere, and I believe that in the cases where it is reported it is due to other factors that aren't being taken into account.
I would love to see a study where other factors have been taken into account, and where this has been applied to a long standing site with decent traffic to begin with if anyone has one?
but also i still don't believe it's impossible to hurt a competitors rankings like everyone is saying. For example what if i had a domain that was hit with a 950 penalty or what not and i removed the content and used 301 redirects to redirect the domain to a competitors domain? Would the penalty no longer apply? im not saying anyone should do anything like this but im just saying i would think theres ways to hurt competitors rankings if someone was really willing to hurt someone else for their own benefit
I don't think this test has been done by the OP. I think this is a hypothetical that the OP wants to find the answer to - "can I spam my web address on YouTube and get away with it?" would be the actual question being asked here.
In my opinion there is no student paper, it's just a "clever" way of getting everyone else to give the pro's and con's of spamming Youtube which we wouldn't do if the question was asked plainly.