Update Dominic - Part 2

[teeceo]

Continued from Part 1: [webmasterworld.com...]

---

Thanks to google for letting us peek into there database( they could very easy close that door to us)and a thanks to googleguy for "DONATING" his time to answer question(that he don't have to) and for keeping thing here (somewhat) calm. Also, thanks to all that work so hard to keep this forum going strong(I for one don't know how I would get along without it:). I could go on and on but, thats all I will say. Later.

teeceo.

[Critter]

GG...please answer my question:

Why did you crawl 10K pages of mine and not include one of them in your index?

Backlinks are irrelevant: you crawled my site big time.

PR is a non-issue: none of my pages are in the index to give PR to...

Peter

[Canary]

Chrisnrae

Yep - would like to make my website my full time living (just p/t) but ft jobs website I was more concerned about :¦.

[soapystar]

>Everyone take a breath. Stop worrying and just double down on cleaning up your sites, and building new content worthy of links. <

these are the sites google has just trashed!

[GoogleGuy]

Critter, what was the IP address of the crawlers? Was it from the main crawl or the fresh crawl? If it was the main crawl, then I would consider that a good sign; as we gradually bring in more backlinks over time, that bodes well for what Google thinks of your site.

[mfishy]

Napolean,

The problem is, Google Guy has not backed this up. Actually, GG started speculation that the spam index would go live by saying that "the sj results would be appearing on other data centers soon"

As far as more factors being added GG only said "newer backlinks and spam snapshots would be pending to be applied over time".

[webdev]

GG thanks for taking the time to look but the other site isn't the one in question....My main site has been indexed for over 5 years and about 1 year on its main theme now...

I just can't understand how the algo can take me from page one for the last 6 months to page 10 when all the other sites are still there.....and some of them still on page 1 use link trades and hidden text....

Its just very frustrating when I see other people doing spam and I make sure I keep it clean because I read these forums and know what can happen....and then this happens...

And I checked my backlinks down from 230 to about 140 but still more than many on page one.

[Dolemite]

GoogleGuy,

Am I correct in interpreting your responses to think that newer backlinks are not yet being applied to the index/SERPs, or simply that they don't yet appear in a link:domain search?

[Critter]

9,650 pages crawled from the deepbot. (216.239.46.*)

[jon80]

Just to give some balance.
The sj serps don't look crazy to me.
My site is squeaky clean and has moved up a little in the serps for a few keyword phrases, but down a little for others.
Pretty much what you would expect.

[MOOSBerlin]

Google Guy said, the sj results would be appearing on other data centers soon

that means, this is the update!

[chrisnrae]

"These are the sites google has just trashed"

That say it for this particular site that got hit of mine. I have PR6 and 7 links (unreturned) from authority sites in the industry and more content than any of those that remain in the top ten (and more backlinks, even though I lost about half of what I had according to SJ, than most of them). How I went from #1 to off the face of the earth is beyond me.

[edited by: chrisnrae at 6:06 pm (utc) on May 5, 2003]

[mifi601]

GG -

I 'only' dropped from #2 to #6, BUT my PR is higher than any other site for my main KW.

I am really worried, that I did something 'to upset the new algo'

I was hoping to get to #1 with this update, working mainly on getting the best content, since I already had the best PR for the whole search ...

I am distraught to say the least

Michael

[soapystar]

jon80>The sj serps don't look crazy to me.>

Phew..everything is ok after all!

[Critter]

Well:

Inktomi's done around 3,500 pages in the last week;

Teoma's up to around 4,500, and is still going;

FAST is up to 1,200 and is still going;

Thank...goodness...

Peter

[Critter]

My thought is that somebody's getting fired at Google shortly. :)

Peter

[skipfactor]

My site is squeaky clean and has moved up a little in the serps for a few keyword phrases

I'm seeing the same jon80 but I'm a small-fry.

[GoogleGuy]

webdev, I know that you're frustrated. I hope that you'll stick with what you're doing, and not worry too much as we bring in new technology. As far as the hidden text, just curious if anyone has reported that site for it yet..

[mfishy]

Maybe since GG keeps saying GRADUALLY bring in more backlinks it suggests that Google will no longer count newly acquired backlinks, cause I can't see any new links

[born2drv]

GoogleGuy,

I just got one simple question for you that has nothing to do with your "secret sauce" but may help aleviate some stress for us.... :)

Question: As it is right now, how satisfied are the Google employees about the new sj results?

a) Very Satisfied
b) Satisfied
c) Average
d) Unsatisfied
e) Very Unsatisfied?

Thank you :)

[chiyo]

Is it just me or does there seem to a significantly higher quotient of childish comments than is usual for an update-related thread?

[Napoleon]

>> The problem is, Google Guy has not backed this up. Actually, GG started speculation that the spam index would go live by saying that "the sj results would be appearing on other data centers soon"

As far as more factors being added GG only said "newer backlinks and spam snapshots would be pending to be applied over time". <<

That's all true Mfishy, but I interpret the latter as an indication that links are missing from the current SJ index.

Common sense disctates that they will be added before the thing is widespread.

I assume, and hope, that this will make all the difference.

Essentially, SJ = slightly adjusted algo on non-up-to-date data (links). Update the data and different results will materialize.

That's my take - and I've not seen anything to contadict it yet.

[edited by: Napoleon at 6:10 pm (utc) on May 5, 2003]

[chrisnrae]

I am just trying to figure out what it is my site got hit for. I have always been a white hat SEO. Maybe that's my problem, LOL. :)

[Yidaki]

>My thought is that somebody's getting fired at Google shortly.

Offending people isn't nice!

[mfishy]

Napolean, I hope you are correct cause I'm not crazy about the idea of no new links showing

[Critter]

Oh brother...now we're getting into the easily offended crowd.

I'm taking a (cold) shower...will be back when not so hot.

:)

Peter

[polarmate]

>>thus spake GoogleGuy: the SJ index isn't an older index. You can verify that by doing a topical query such as SARS. The results are more fresh in SJ than they are in our regular index.

In which case, why does my site have a bad affiliate URL that was seen only after the Jan update? I get the part about backlinks so I won't be extra thick and say "I have no backlinks" but the fact is that even after a re-sync of the indexes, I will continue to have no backlinks if this bad URL is going to be awarded to us yet again. This bad URL *has* no backlinks - for that matter it does not exist anymore cos I got the affiliate to correct it ...

[webdev]

GG considering my previous post about reporting spam I'm a little bit worried to I'm afraid....I report one site on page one below me, I dissapear and everyone else stays....I'm a bit worried about doing it again.....

When you say new technology do you mean bring this in before the results move across all data centers or are we talking over a number of weeks/months...I just wondered if my site is likely to see daylight again for a while..... if this is the final results...

[Istvan]

GoogleGuy,

Can you please answer my question: Why are there again loads of sites which use expired domains in the index?

I mean.. wasn't that a closed book already? This update is full of junk, I am sorry I have no other words for it.

Istvan

[Napoleon]

Well it would make sense Mfishy. They are testing the ALGO, not the data. The data is the fodder of the algo and can be replaced fairly easily in common scenarios.

In the case of a search engine, the data is as critical to the results as the algo.... so there still seems to be scope of substantial changes.

GG?

[mipapage]

GoogleGuy said:

we're starting slowly on hidden text by taking sites that have been mentioned in a spam report.

and:

mcavic, I think I did say that newer backlinks and spam snapshots would be pending to be applied over time. Or at least I tried to. :)

Hey GoogleGuy, just to calm some nerves, I was wondering if, well, you could calm some nerves!

I see the same old spam in -sj that's been around for awhile. From what you said above, if we have sent in reports over the last while, I take it we should just sit tight, and maybe not move into the "Spam is falling from the sky" phase, nor send in more copies reporting the same old same old?

- Mike