Thanks for that. So the present dramatic drops are not the same thing as the -50 penalty from several years ago. That was for very extreme manipulation, especially in backlinks.
martinacastro
6:59 pm on Nov 8, 2010 (gmt 0)
Always we take care about unique content but now we must take care of having much more Unique and usefull content. In my case I disover that an old webmaster that I had in the past use in some sections non unique content. I delete some content and rewrite 100% others.
Planet13
7:59 am on Nov 9, 2010 (gmt 0)
I read through the posts from JohnMu in that link but didn't find any mention of the minus 50 penalty.
tedster
8:07 am on Nov 9, 2010 (gmt 0)
You may be right - the OP reported "the site appeared on page 50+", not "position 50". I just assumed it was foggy wording.
brinked
9:00 am on Nov 9, 2010 (gmt 0)
not really breaking news. All penalties have to do with site quality. But yeah, being on the last page means your site is of very poor quality such as a scraper site, no unique content etc. I can tell you that from lots of experience. There is also over optimization penalties which dont knock you down as far and can get you out of it with quality backlinks. Heh, I can write a novel about penalties. Google how you have costed me so many sleepless nights.
indyank
10:43 am on Nov 9, 2010 (gmt 0)
I could only gather this from that thread.The user who has raised the issue seems to be questioning google on whether it is fair to change things around in a short time span. Apparently he is hinting that google had done something to favor aggregator sites in may and it has reversed it in october 21.
Is this really what happened in october? Are content aggregators affected by the oct.21 change?
