Penguin - is it run periodically or continually?

[driller41]

It seems that Panda is run at certain times and the results are adjusted after each Panda iteration.

Is Penguin the same or it is a continual evaluation process?

[bluemoonshine]

Good question, i like to know that also.

[netmeg]

At one point I seem to recall someone from Google saying it was "done" - but that's not to say it hasn't been fired up again, or isn't going to be refined and run again.

[driller41]

From Searchengineland:-
[searchengineland.com...]

That leads to another important point. Penguin, like Panda, is a filter that gets refreshed from time-to-time. Penguin is not constantly running but rather is used to tag things as spam above-and-beyond Google’s regular spam filtering on a periodic basis.

So assuming this is correct my question has been answered, so I suppose the various fixes I have put in place will not be looked at until the next update happens.

[jsherloc]

Yeah IMO this is essentially one big filter that runs periodically a la Panda. So you will now see small tight hyperfocused hyperspammed EMDs dominating for a month or 2 months, then they'll crank up the "trust/age/authority/brand" filters a bit more, then we will repeat this cycle all over again when they crank up the "relevancy" filter ie hello again hyper-spammed EMDs. Seems to go something like:

Increase trust signals, decrease relevancy signals
Increase Relevancy signals, decrease trust signals

And it just repeats itself on a "macro" level...

You can make A LOT of money taking advantage of these filter "windows" or time period gaps between these data refreshes, and people in the major $$$ verticals certainly are doing so if you take a look at their site age/link portfolios etc lol. 301s are absolutely dominating Google right now, as well as HIGH PR links (under the radar). Google had to clean house with all of the networks before they ran these algo updates, because IMO MANY websites would have coasted right through the algo updates like Penguin if they still had massive amount of HIGH PR links, essentially simulated authority signals enough to pass these new aggressive algo filters. They got rid of a lot of these major networks and it is much easier for Google to identify and "demote" IM/aff-style websites with crappy automated spammy backlinks and poor anchor diversification, as they don't have the inflated authority the high PR networks/links were providing them.

Google just cut the "net" out from under many of these websites, and then unleashed Penguin to seal the deal now that the websites lost their "authority pass". Google hates these networks more than any other type of link because they attack the heart of the Google algo, and simply put, they work REALLY well with the aggressively link-reliant algo Google has built (hint they simulate authority and along with other social/brand signals can keep websites on the good side of the filter theshold each new Penguin-like creature looks for), so it is in Google's best interest to get rid of blog networks and other highly popular easily-abused HIGH PR homepage links etc before each and every algo pass IMO.

Seems like all of the algo updates just go back and forth trying to find a balance between trust/relevancy. When the trust filter is high, more branded big guys get to play, when the relevancy filter is high, more little guys with hundreds of EMDs with hundreds of different link types get to play in the organics, but only for a shortwhile usually lol.

[driller41]

You can make A LOT of money taking advantage of these filter "windows" or time period gaps between these data refreshes,

That is a powerful thought jsherloc which I think is right, today is the age of the private blog network. Get enough pr authority and anchor text problems are greatly reduced.

[jsherloc]

@driller41, and I believe many popular SEO/IM bloggers are starting to do write-ups on this very topic. Basically discussing how the major companies out there all engage in massive link manipulation to "succeed" in the most aggressively link-reliant algo in history, but they do and WILL coast through most of these aggressive "over optimization" algo updates coming down the pipeline because of their authority (cumulatively speaking, onpage offpage etc), except for a few companies that seem to get gobbled up and spit back out a few months later after whining, negative PR, etc...

Not so much "leveling the playing field" IMO, more like "throwing average webmasters out into the middle of the roman coliseum while the big brands perched high in the stands mock us and laugh at our slow painful deaths that are caused by us doing what is required to stay alive inside the coliseum".

Moneyyyyyyyy, rullllles the world.