Forum Moderators: open
What could be the problem?
And no, you don't know what you're talking about in this respect; links don't get "stale". If anything they have more weight because they are from a well-established site. What evidence have you seen to back your theory? I've never heard of people having to continually get fresh new supplies of links, personally.
A. Never assume that because a najority of the people behave in one manner that all do. When you "assume" it makes and "ass" out of "u" and "me" Well not me in this case.
B. My results and your results are not the issue here and I did not come here to argue with anyone who thinks they are an expert nor do I feel the need to prove myself. For proof I post each clients weekly results for all to see.
C. Googles ever fluctuating program as you call it is their move recently from monthly updating to continual updating. Due to the distributed computing enviroment they built and their various data centers and trying to update 8,000,000,000 pages over the net what results you see today will likely be different tomorrow and the next day and so on.
Your results when submitting a search query would depend on how close you are to a datacenter or which datacenter has the least load, therefore results in New Jersey may be different than results in California on the same day for the same keyword term.
I hope this helps explain " googles fluctuating program" you so professionally described.
Thank you for your time and thoughts, however misguided they may be.
Clint
C. Googles ever fluctuating program as you call it is their move recently from monthly updating to continual updating. Due to the distributed computing enviroment they built and their various data centers and trying to update 8,000,000,000 pages over the net what results you see today will likely be different tomorrow and the next day and so on.Your results when submitting a search query would depend on how close you are to a datacenter or which datacenter has the least load, therefore results in New Jersey may be different than results in California on the same day for the same keyword term.
I hope this helps explain " googles fluctuating program" you so professionally described.
Mr. you are sooo far off from even beginning to recognize a problem and or solution its amazing. what do you visit this forum to reguritate the comments of others to sound intelligent. This is silly, your "advice" utterly fails to address the problem at hand, and sounds more like a pompous lecture about a topic you know very little of. (ouch that sounds harsh...sorry). But please please focus on what people are posting and share your own experiences with the unique problem we have expressed. I wouldnt be posting on here if this problem was the usual ban/penalty bs... google changed somthing dramatically, and we already have a few ideas as to what triggers this NEW auto-ban. See you are old, your discussing topics that were relevant to bans and penalties already discussed months if not years ago on these boards.. what is happening is somthing new, and I predict others will be sharing their own disaster stories as well shortly.
Im gonna wait until first of december when we see some changes again or before, then I make up my mind if Google realy becomming a shareholder SE with all intention on money, then search results.
I know its a bad time right now, but you have to see it cool.
Actually, links do get stale in a sense, simply because the value of backlinks, in most cases, continually declines on links/resources pages. Those webmasters frequently add more outbound links, thus reducing the pr value of previously established links to other sites.
Now if I put a page up with new relevant links and competitors links are 6 months old or more, which site will be more relevant?
The thing that changed was the Internet Backlink Update last month which downgraded the weighting of reciprocal links, and increased the popularity of one way links and Googles continual updating.
Also how I found this was doing a Google Search for "website" in the beginning of October. When the results came up I almost lost my dentures..( I dont have any but to make the children here happy I tossed that in) Two new entries were there that had never been before.
The two new entries were the websites for George Bush and John Kerry.
Looking at how these sites may have been searched for and how relevancy came into play, most people probably typed in the keyword terms "bush website" and "kerry website". Since millions of people used these search terms Googlebot then decided that the "bush website" and "kerry website" were now relevant to anyone who typed in the search term "website"
What else do you need to see the light?
Ohh and one last thing to make you even more insane.
Links are only a small part of Google PageRank
Check out this site
Google PR4, brand new to the web, and only has one inbound link on Google.
<snip>
Everything you think you know, is something someone else already forgot!
Clint
[edited by: ciml at 11:32 am (utc) on Nov. 30, 2004]
[edit reason] No specifics please. [/edit]
Your age does not equal the quality of your knowledge (or else you might know that posting URLs is forbidden here).
Links are votes...simple as that we in America do not use votes from previous elections in our current elections.No, its absolutely nothing like that at all.
Check out this siteThen why the copyright 2001-2003 at the bottom of the very slow loading page?Google PR4, brand new to the web, and only has one inbound link on Google.
Yes google seems to devalue bought links, when they are obvious, so most aren't, and are set up as paid text links without PR being mentioned.
Yes Google will downgrade the value of old link pages, where the webmaster does not remove dead links from the apges. No, Google does not do this if the link pages are kept clean.
Yes, experience is worth something, but must keep your knoweldge up to date. I started on a trs80... hehe I still have it.... But nothing I learned 25 years ago serves me now
Which in a way I guess helps with Google if that is possible.
It is slow loading ....I have nothing to do with that, not my site, not my client. Though this doesn't seem to effect the Google PR however it would probably not attain front page results being so slow.
Yes, experience is worth something, but must keep your knoweldge up to date. I started on a trs80... hehe I still have it.... But nothing I learned 25 years ago serves me now
HaHa ..you should donate that piece to the Smithsonian.
Does it still work?
I thought about your statement about nothing you learned 25 years ago serves you now...remember kindergarten? I learned more there that I use now than all the rest of my schoooing...
How to share, show & tell, recess, playing with toys...and I think it was the only time I was an honors student ;->
Peace!
This can be attributed to googles continual indexing.
Clint
Thank you for the insite...though somehow to me, if your backlinks disappear and your site disappears...which makes it seem that they maybe interelated...add to that the fact that Googles new indexing strategy effects both links and websites it seems everything is "on" topic.
Thank you for moderating...
We'd be able to have a much more productive discussion on why this is happening if we didn't have to wade through pages of unrelated issues.
of two sites I manage that disappeared (were in top 20, then not in top 500) one's back as of this evening, and ranking a few places better. The other's still a lost sheep, so its a mixed bag of good/bad.
And it probably proves absolutly nothing, yet.
IE
type in [<snip>.com...]
Results 1 - 10 of about 733 for "+www.<snip>.+com/"
Then go back and delete the www from the url
[<snip>.com...]
Results 1 - 10 of about 16 for "http://<snip>.+com/".
and then without the http or www
<snip>.com
Results 1 - 10 of about 828 for "<snip>.+com".
Here is what I believe is happening to some of you.
The way you get links to your site effects your PR with Google and if the links are set in any of the different methods above you are not getting full credit for all your links.
If site A links to you with [yourwebsiteurl.com...] and Site B links to you with www.yoursiteurl.com It is seen as a link to a different site.
If you find this to be the case let me know and also let me know which server you are on.
If it is unix linux I can give you a Apache Mod Rewrite that will force all your links to go to the full domain url.
If you are on Windoze you will need someone to do an ISAPI rewrite
Clint
[edited by: ciml at 11:36 am (utc) on Nov. 30, 2004]
[edit reason] Examplified [/edit]
You really shouldn't be posting URLs here though, you've already been told twice. The mods just aren't around to remove them, or they wouldn't have lasted 2 hours.
Guess its the fact I post in other forums that have no restrictions to posting urls.
Was I supposed to read every thread here before posting? Were you required to?
Do all of you have chips on your shoulders because of google?
If your business only survives off googles liking your business or not..should you be in business?
Clint
If your business only survives off googles liking your business or not..should you be in business?Now see there's a good question. It is possible to manage a successful business with Google as your main source of traffic. To do so, however, requires that you have many unrelated sites. Otherwise you can buy a house one day, only to have it repossessed the next.
<added>that would be the apache forum, not the unix one</added>
Google posts this on their site:
What are the most common abuses a website owner is likely to encounter?
One common scam is the creation of "shadow" domains that funnel users to a site by using deceptive redirects. These shadow domains often will be owned by the SEO who claims to be working on a client's behalf. However, if the relationship sours, the SEO may point the domain to a different site, or even to a competitor's domain. If that happens, the client has paid to develop a competing site owned entirely by the SEO.
Another illicit practice is to place "doorway" pages loaded with keywords on the client's site somewhere. The SEO promises this will make the page more relevant for more queries. This is inherently false since individual pages are rarely relevant for a wide range of keywords. More insidious however, is that these doorway pages often contain hidden links to the SEO's other clients as well. Such doorway pages drain away the link popularity of a site and route it to the SEO and its other clients, which may include sites with unsavory or illegal content.
Ok no urls ..phew
So if Google knows about the shadow domains wouldn't they just as well know about hijackers of other types and have implemented the steps in the algos to stop this.?
Since this has been the case for a while now it would lead me back to the sites disapperaing due to links that were bought sold or traded traced to the origiating point of sale and then back to the clients site.
Ive also found an SEO company who is using duplicate content and links swaps or buying to achieve front pages listings on google but eventuallt the sites are falling off the results entirely.
The dupe content is stored in folders like so:
www.yoursite.com/links/index3.html
www.yoursite.com/links/index4.html
Then if you look at the pages the content is 95% the same..for instance in the headline tag on one page it reads
"would you like to trade links" with xyzsite
The next page
"would you like to swap links" with xyzsite
I looked and perhaps 5 words in total were changed out of about 700.
Amazingly the seo site is in a 3rd world country and guarantees front page rankings on google.
moooo
oops..
The ironic thing is I bid on half the sites this guy is screwing down the drain....
.every dog has his day.
Clint
A clients site has gone from Google, only a small (40 page) site but 100% ethical on SEO as it hasn't been worked on much and all of the SEO has been basic good sense stuff that i've never seen punished.
Here's the rub, on Yahoo and MSN the site ranks #1 for hundreds of - city service - phrases and is, in my opinion one of the best sites of its kind. It even beats the hundreds of PPC directory sites on Yahoo and MSN but didn't on Google, seems that google is forgetting about relevancy.
Whilst ranting about relevancey, is anyone sick of the "my index is bigger than yours" spat that is gathering pace with google / msn as it did years ago? would anyone like to see a totally irrelevant index of billions of pages come out just to put a stop to the escalating "war"? I could arrange it.
If you feel you were deceived by an SEO in some way, you may want to report it.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) handles complaints about deceptive or unfair business practices. To file a complaint, visit: [ftc.gov...] and click on "File a Complaint Online", call 1-877-FTC-HELP, or write to:
Federal Trade Commission
CRC-240
Washington, D.C. 20580
f your complaint is against a company in another country, please file it at [econsumer.gov...]
[edited by: ciml at 11:37 am (utc) on Nov. 30, 2004]
[edit reason] No unlinked URLs please. [/edit]
Clint
How does it look with you site which have lost ranking of index page or internal sites?
Today, my site got its PR back (PR6)
But when i do a search for [url.com...] - google replies:
Sorry, no information is available for the URL
Could it be an index page ban? (single page ban/penalty) ?
