Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
[edited by: tedster at 4:54 am (utc) on Apr 1, 2012]
Anyone else see some major changes yesterday?
I agree...but a very, VERY, VEEEEERY bad move on Google's part if they try to herd us to G+. People are not using facebook like they used to, yet we are being force fed all these social apps and junk we're supposed to add to our sites in order to "fit in" and rank high from our "social interaction". That model doesn't fit every business.
Which is absolutely, positively and forever impossible. So don't even go down that road because it's a dead end.
A blog which has 1 comment on all the front-page posts combined. And the posts are ripped off from other websites. It is 1 year old, poor backlink profile. TONS OF ADS above the fold. Doesn't load quickly. Has a spammy title "Tiny Widgets for Him | Tiny Widgets for Her" is the title.
Here's what I don't understand: Websites which have no business being in the top 10 are hanging out there for the past month+.
I honestly think Google has made a massive mistake with this algo. When reading about the SERPs in different forums and seo sites I see much more webmasters complaining than praising this latest update.
The ones praising IMHO seem to be less clued-in about how SEO works and the purpose of it - both on-page and off-page.
Good solid SEO helps make sites better. It helps webmasters make their sites more relevant and of a higher quality.
Punish SEO and you are left with exactly what we are getting - garbage.
I know a lot of people were upset by the initial Panda update but at least the results were still relevant. This update has left many of the SERPs in a mess.
This algo is definitely broken.
The SERPs are just NOT relevant in several niches I am looking at and the changes seem to be slowing down. 2 sites that clearly do not have any business being in the results at all have been hovering around the top 3 spots since all this started.
A page with a pixelated image as its ONLY content and 5 pages of scanned copy has also been moving up at a constant rate. It now occupies position 11 in the SERPs for a competitive search phrase. I have no doubt it will sneak onto page 1.
I don't know about anyone else but I am totally fed up with this. Google releases guidelines for webmasters to follow. We follow them. Then Google changes it's mind and we get penalised.
If Google ranked RELEVANT sites instead of convoluting its algo to factor in its own revenue streams this simply wouldn't happen.
Google has a monopoly on the Internet and it should be held accountable for the damage it is causing to small to medium business. At the very least it should be forced to be more transparent.
Didn't JFK say in a speech to the press that, "The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings."
I honestly think it's time we stood up to this.
I see similar isolated reports, but I monitor a LOT of search terms. There are a few anomolies, but frankly it is NOT widespread.
Possible bug in a roll out?
Googler JohnMu last response to the thread was just an hour ago saying they'll look at it. 1 hour 30 minutes later, the 3 users in question all report their sites back up?
[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 7:46 pm (utc) on Apr 18, 2012]
it is adsense, yes, but I don't think that's a reason why they would allow it. Having that many ads above the fold is probably hurting G's advertisers BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE WILL LIKELY CLICK to just get out of the website since it looks absolutely horrible.
It sounded like the Emma issue was more due to a shared hosting account......Apparently a lot of the people that were complaining lost all of their sites that were tied to specific IP's.
Re: Those missing sites.
Sounds an awful lot like a database partition was excluded from the index for a short while.
Looking at the backlinking profile of Being Emme in OSE it shows heavy optimization for the term "Being Emme".
joined:June 3, 2007