Do manual spam actions still expire?

[n00b1]

I believe the last 'official' word on this came from a video featuring Catt Muts in 2011. Does anybody have any recent experience regarding 'manual spam actions' expring (or seemingly not doing so?)

[bhartzer]

From what I've seen, they still expire after 90 days.

[1script]

From what I've seen, they still expire after 90 days.

Yeah, if only. 13 months later still waiting on the expiration of an extremely harsh manual action (zero Google traffic although site is well-indexed)

Still, what was the "official word" on that, even if back from 2011, that n00b1 refers to?

[Sgt_Kickaxe]

It stands to reason that if a human evaluator decides it was your intent to cheat that they have a permanent be-gone button. If they feel, on the other hand, that your site just isn't quite ready for that top ranked spot the manual -50 is likely going to expire.

I know of a site owner who doled out backlinks publicly on his blog if others would write about his blog and link to it. Google got upset and made it so he could not rank in the top 25 for anything. His blog wasnt removed from Google but page one was off limits.

When the penalty expired 2 YEARS later he shot to #1 for a lot of keywords and got an instant 250,000 visitors a month.

[jimbeetle]

It stands to reason that if a human evaluator decides it was your intent to cheat that they have a permanent be-gone button.

If by "human evaluator" you're referring to the folks who evaluate the SERPs, please *don't* confuse them with the web spam team, the folks who do have that shiny red button.

[RedCardinal]

In a webmaster Central Hangout within the past couple of weeks JohnMu said that all manual spam penalties were automatically released after time. I think it was 1 year max. He explained why also.

If you search the YouTube channel you will likely find the Hnagout on Air. He uploads these under his own username.

[n00b1]

Do you happen to remember the date of the Hangout? That's just the kind of thing I was looking for.

On a somewhat related note, on "Webmaster Central office-hours, September 10, 2012" about 23 minutes JohnMu addresses a question about what exactly an inorganic link is. But his response to the second part of the question intrigues me as he basically seems to be saying that links on guest posts on related blogs in your industry are not considered entirely 'organic'. He may have been referring to anchor-specific links on websites that tend to accept pretty much any old content but I'm not sure. I always thought this was a good and valid sort of link to have.

Edit: I think my question is answered on 'Webmaster Central office-hours, September 7, 2012 (a)' at the 7-10 minute mark. JohnMu specicially says that sometimes manual actions are in place for a year or more so you generally wouldn't want to 'wait it out'. And pretty much dot on the 10 minute mark he is asked if they all expire and he says "as far as I know they all expire, yes."

[1script]

manual actions are in place for a year or more so you generally wouldn't want to 'wait it out'

Waiting it out is not a good strategy anyway because the expiration of the penalty seems to be also triggered by changes on the site. In other words, a site that has just been left untouched may have the penalty expire much longer than 1 year (I've had it for 20 months once) where a site that is constantly updating and changing may come out in 6 months or less.
I've had instances of both, and in any case, there is no guarantee that it will expire in one year. I don't know about two years or another such long period because it generally does not matter at this point - a site devoid of Google traffic for two years will be essentially crippled for life because of its missing out on all the exposure, new links, new accounts, bookmarks etc. Unless there's no competition in this niche (are there still any like that?), the competitors will be so much ahead that it might just as well be easier to start a new site.