Forum Moderators: open
steveb, I believe the 64.x.x.x data center has the change, but I'm not positive. We use different terminology inside Google. :)
Powdork, I'm not sure if you'd call it an update exactly (different algorithms play more of a role than different data). But I'm guessing the change will probably roll out over the course of the weekend.
[google.com...]
[edited by: Chndru at 5:43 pm (utc) on Feb. 13, 2004]
Tried an e-commerce search and found a lot more affiliate portal junk near the top of 64 than the other two.
</data points>
I'm seeing results that are very similar to those before Florida on phrases I watch closely, there is an improvement for me. However, after all the hassle of the last couple of months I take this with a large pinch of salt ... anything can happen.
this #1 and #2 site has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, no content, nothing.
is this the best 50 phds and billions of dollars can get you nowadays? consider me unimpressed.
althought the links pointing to the site have dramtically increased just under a thousand.
I would have thought it would come back afther the next update but i got it wrong.
Caveman Wrote: I'm not sure about the 'age' piece; the number of pages and number of backlinks is nothing new. What is new, or perhaps still the case since Florida/Austin only more stringent, is that if you don't clear some hurdle(s), your pages are *nowhere* to be found, rather than just further down in the pile.
Nice theory - I kind of agree with that. One of my sites has gone, another has returned from it's 2 month holiday in limboland. What a strange update this is!
I'm seeing results that are very similar to those before Florida on phrases I watch closely, there is an improvement for me.
In my niche what I'm seeing is not pre Florida. It is Austin with those sites that were dropped at Florida for no logical reason returned to what is the right rank. What has now dropped out is autogenerated directory crap. The good sites that came up at Florida, OK I admit there were a couple! Seem to have stuck.
It looks like the dream ticket to me!
Best wishes
Sid
I know there's no going back, but I feel a bit like a guy who's been out in the desert for 2 days with no food or water being offered a glass of cloudy water.
Back in the safety of my office, I would never have touched such water. Now, like most everyone else, I'm thankful because it's a lot better than no water.
The 64.**** IP's look pretty good to me, not quite the same as pre-Florida though. But much better than it has been. The 216.**** IP looks like I'm back in the desert again. I hope that is not the one that sticks, from what people are saying that seems to be the case. Right now I'm thankful for the cloudy water.
There seems to be more commercial sites with less informational value popping up in my territory.
-squared
steveb: Who were Crazy Janie and the Chicken Man?
Oh please let it be true
Monty python SE-"and now for something completely different!"
[edited by: 1milehgh80210 at 6:08 pm (utc) on Feb. 13, 2004]
Since Florida, despair, dread, and the abyss of insomnia have been my constant companions.
I would not call these Pre-Florida results; the algos and filters have certainly evolved. I will say that I am breathing easier and do see an overall improvement (in both selfish and objective terms). - Jane
2 Spammy competitors in top 10. My site - gone!
D'oh!
Jon
Hope 64 is the real thing. Sites I've brought back since Austin stiill there and some I thought I had lost forever moved up to 2nd page position 12-15. In my sector, some of the fluff gone at the top. A step in the right direction for G.
With all the changes made to figure this out, if pre Flordia alog was applied to current content it wouldn't look like pre Florida.
All in all, I have to say these SERPS look clean.
Bleary GoogleGuy just rolled out of bed, and I'm already 2 minutes late to meet someone--and I'm at home instead of work. :)
I'll check in over the course of the day though.
Thank you Google for taking note and again getting the SERP's *mostly* :) back to normal.
GoogleGuy - I am sure this has to be a much needed refreshing thread based on the other death threads.
Again nice changes.
This is by far the best Google SERPs ever. 64.233.161.99.
[edited by: bull at 7:21 pm (utc) on Feb. 13, 2004]
The keyword I'll be looking for is "brandyupdate" as all one word, either by email to webmaster [at] google.com or via a spam report.
Shucks, just submitted one via spam report as "brandy" attn: GoogleGuy. Hopefully you get it <g>.
Great algo adjustment overall :-)
Welcome back!
That is the oddest, and most troubling part of the "new Google".
Also, this is the strongest case that they are in fact using some sort of filter. The problem is, that the pages/sites getting caught in it are pretty good in many cases while others that maybe should have been weeded out remain.
There are areas of improvements, but as EliteWeb pointed out a few hours ago, the real estate industry SERPs are still a mess, even more so if you use a cityname.
I understand the difficulty in trying to determine what a user wants. But when the query is CITYNAME REAL ESTATE, can't we assume that 8 or 9 out of 10 people are looking for web sites that list real estate or homes for sale in that city, or perhaps real estate agents or agencies in that city? This current algo still fills the Top 10 with Yahoo Directory, Google Directory, AOL City Guide, and other similar directory/city guide sites.
And secondly,
I'm not sure the idea of letting a user say "I want info." or "I want to shop" will settle anything. Many excellent commercial sites ARE excellent because of the great info. they offer. In fact, don't we consider those the best examples of great commercial sites? (One thing that makes Amazon so great is all the information they have about the products, including user reviews, etc.)
Why should such a commercial site be excluded from the SERPs when someone indicates they don't want to shop?
That is the oddest, and most troubling part of the "new Google".
The issue in my view is that this mechanism is cutting out some of the lovely/cool/unique/informative hobby and mom & pop sites that should be reappearing by now, but still aren't.
Perhaps it's a way of targetting small spammy e-commerce sites with an insufficient number of pages and/or backlinks, but again, it's the baby/bathwater problem. Maybe on the next go-round, G could take this set of hurdles and attach them to an 'and/if' stmt that relates in some way to OOP measures they trust...which might let more of the smaller but legit hobby/info/enthusiast sites back in?
BTW Update seems better in terms of killing out some quite visible spam.
Google,
Your destination is still too far though.
BTW, given the enormous negative vs. positive responses from Florida and Austin, I find it uplifting that the positive responses are leading the way here. Thanks to GG and the plex for "adjusting" and seemingly reacting to feedback.
