Forum Moderators: open
Isn't there a limit to something like this? It's been that way for a few months now and they continue to crank out newer sites that clog it even more. Anybody?
Happy New Year!
A good long term strategy will payoff many times over. Short termism leads to bans. Just think that short term is looked at in terms of months rather than years. I can accept a spammy competitor being there for months because I know long term they are going to pay.
I am currently competing on a term where two major national public corparations are having a spam battle. Even with this all I have to do is stay top ten and I will take traffic from them because the client base I am looking for is slightly different to theirs.
A lot of factors need to be taken into account when promoting a site and Brett's advice, although apparently simplistic and naive is actually advice that will stand you in good stead in the long term (and I'm talking years when I talk long term). This is what I hope most of us are looking for - a long term stable income from our sites.
The particular type of spam I am talking about is like this:
One of my competitors (a recently, former dmoz editor) has a website that sells foot widgets (not really anything to do with feet, just an example).
He offers foot widgets in several sizes and from several manufacturers. His "main website" has all of the sizes and manufacturers categorized and listed, just like any other site you would go find. He has also built separate websites, that visually look very similar. One or two websites for each manufacturer, one or two websites for each size, and dozens of other "content" websites that are doorways, maybe not the traditional doorway you think of, but simply each site is 1-4 pages of keyword stuffed general information that pertains to foot widgets. All of the sites point back to his main website.
To take it one step further, he has another dozen or so domains, that are framesets, optimized for each variation of the keyword, that contain his main website content with a different color scheme or slightly different design. He HAD dozens of these sites listed in each of his dmoz categories and also at Y!
I was able to compile all of this information in less than an hour and submit it to dmoz, G & Y!
The next day he was removed from dmoz along with all of his websites, two days and a 20 minute phone call later, he was removed from Y!
So, my question is: Does he really deserve to have dozens of his single page sites listed in the top 30 for search results? Do you think this is some form of spam? Do you think that it's a waste of time for me to spend an hour and a half reporting this?
BTW, the same day I reported him, I also wrote 4 articles and distributed them to a couple dozen websites and newsletters, went out to dinner, saw the new Star Trek Movie and played with my kids for a couple hours.
I'm not saying that board members openly defend spamming, but several posts have been made to the effect of "don't waste your time" "stop whining and develop content" "don't be a whistle blower" and also posts concluding that if it works, join them, don't fight them.
People want to make it sound like you're doing something bad if you actively seek and out and report people that are cheating. Where would our country be today if people didn't stand up for what's right?
A level playing field: Not that all sites are treated equally, but that everyone has to play by the same rules. Would football be fair if the visiting team was given only three downs, but the home team got an unlimited set of downs. If we all do what my former competitor did, where would it end. Are you telling me that instead of standing up for what's right, I should be filling up hundreds of websites with duplicate content and splitting my product line into individual websites? Are you suggesting that I should make some minor graphical changes to those websites and duplicate them over and over?
hmm.
The Search Engine ToS/ToU are not the Internet rules. And once the Search Engine technology can eliminate the web sites they don’t want in their index this conversation and ones like it will be moot.
I am not arguing Brett's philosophy, and I am actually doing quite well playing within the rules. I have been quite successful on the internet since 1996 and have had several years of over $1m in sales. I own several separate companies, online and off, I have a staff of dedicated and talented people. I am very diversified and have decided to take the approach of long term stability, playing within the rules. I don't think that I am the problem.
My problem (if that's what people want to call it)is that I will not stand by and wait for someone else to take action, if I see something wrong, and have the ability to do something about it, I am going to take action myself. To take that one step further, I am going to share the information with other that feel the same way.
I plan on spending some time this year to develop a place where people can go to learn how to fight back against this type of abuse, to document abuse and to provide information, tools and resources that will help "honest" people take action against those who are cheating.
I'm not tyring to pick a fight with board members, but I do want to encourage other webmasters to stand up for what's right and report those who break the rules.
as you can tell by my extremely long posts, I have no problem developing content.. lol
I'm wondering, are you saying that by this person breaking or "bending" the rules, he is creating bad karma, or are you saying that my active and aggressive approach to fighting back is?
Just wondering where you stand on this and exactly what you were referring to?
Personally I like to look at myself as a Godless purveyor of gambling.
Same here. What many forget is that 99%+ of all searches people do aren't adult related or commercial searches where affiliates are an issue. That Google works 99%+ of the time for people is what counts for Google.
<added> One of your domains? Yeah, the one without any spam by chance!?
I have personally reported 3 dmoz editors that have been removed, this one is a real problem, but despite the threats, I will uncover the truth and get to the bottom of it.
I may not win all of my battles, but I will not be one of the people on here that can be scared off. I decided today not to sit around while some people scare others off, and to voice some of my positive experiences. You can do something about it. The question on this thread was, "How can they get away with it" and I want to share some info, that something can be done about it. I have already shared this info with several people who have contacted me from this thread for information on how to spot, report and gather evidence.
I kept my mouth shut about this topic for a long time on this board, which seems to be the common factor among all of those contacting me. Nobody wanted to be "marked" or branded" as a whistle blower. I respect and thank Brett for giving everyone the opportunity to voice their opinions publicly and support users on here having the right to voice their opinions. I guess I decided today to make it public that people can stand up for what is right and that they can achieve results. I have had mixed results, mostly I am disappointed that google seems to do nothing about it, but I'm sure this will eventually change.
Were the people who founded the United States were just a bunch of whistle blowers?
I'm not comparing myself to the revolutionaries who fought for our freedom, but somebody had to speak up. Something can be done. There is a solution.
The way I see it is, why should we just shut up and be patient while the cheaters make profits?
Some people have decided to break the rules, those people somehow slipped under the radar, do you expect me to sit around and allow the cheaters to prosper?
I'm sure this has touched some nerves on many people. From what I've seen today, there are a lot of people who have neglected to post about reporting spam, because they did not want the heat. I decided to take the heat, now I would imagine that there are several people who would love to post something against me, but they don't want to be marked as spammers or to draw attention to themselves. Ironic isn't it?
Anyway, I have to get some work done tonight, anyone else who needs info on compiling and reporting spam, let me know. Keep the requests coming, I will make the time to help as best I can. I have had contact with a few people who are going to work with me to develop some things that will be sure to shake things up quite a bit. :)
How Can They Get Away With It?
"It's bad karma. What goes around - comes around."
Could you please explain what "It" you are referring to?
Thanks.
Agressive competition wears many faces. Some people find ways to climb to the top. Other people prefer to knock the top guys off their perch if they can. Some people try to do both.
Your industry is a dog-eat-dog world, isn't it?
Now where did I put that email address for that google spam report? LOL
<added> Darnbarn said,
image alt tags are a good place for mis-spellings too.I found this quote here [webmasterworld.com...] Arnt you promoting the use of SPAM </added>
[edited by: Lots0 at 7:00 am (utc) on Jan. 2, 2003]
Added quoting darnbarn> "I have a page, where the background is white, the table cells alternate between white cells with black text and dark blue cells, that have the text title for each section. In the dark blue cells, I would like to have white text, I don't because this would be seen as white text on a white background, right?"
Everyone has their own opinions about what is spam, and I can see different points of view, if you are using "shady techniques" to reach targeted people, is it really spam? I mean, if you are posting hundreds of websites to sell your widgets, and targeting them to people looking for widgets, is it spam? Surely if you targeted people looking for gidgets it would be. This is a grey area, in the moral concept, and I can understand that some people look at it this way, and those people are making money. So if it works, and morally there's nothing wrong with it, it's not like satan worshippers targeting Mormons, but, it is breaking the rules and it is diluting quality search results with duplicates that the general surfer has to wade through. All in all, it's not a good thing, and I'm sure that those who do it, do not intend to be dishonest, or try to cheat people, they just want to get their widget in front of people looking for widgets. It makes sense, but where does it end? If we all do it, will Google be a great place to search?
I am going to leave you with a quote from Google’s Webmaster Information located here
[google.com...]
Make sure that your TITLE and ALT tags are descriptive and accurate.
[edited by: Lots0 at 8:10 am (utc) on Jan. 2, 2003]
There was also a statement that maybe my competitor deserved 8 of the top 10 listings and that people just whine when they get beat in the serps. In this instance, I don't understand... I am #2 for the search term, he is not beating me, it's just that he has his main site and 7 mirrors and doorways. I could easily make a bunch of mirrors, then the top 30 would all just be him and I. Do you think this is the right thing to do?
This is my whole point, if we all do this, and if it's not stopped, than the average searcher would just get a few websites filling up dozens of pages of results... I understand it's a dog eat dog world, especially on the net, but where does it end. I'm sure even those of you who are busy building all your duplicate sites and doorways would rather just work on your one website, I'm sure that most people are doing it because it's the only way for them to compete.
It has to end somewhere, and nothing will be done if everyone thinks it's a waste of time. Sometimes it is a waste of time, but often things can be done, and eventually it will be fixed and there will be new issues. Who's going to take the step and do something about it?
I agree that too many people whine about it, and whining was not my intention. My intention is to chare with people that something can be done, but it's up to them to do it.
I'm not complaining about the spammers, I have been eliminating them one by one for the past couple of months, I'm not whining, I'm winning. :)
[edited by: Lots0 at 8:51 am (utc) on Jan. 2, 2003]
Medical site huh - And here I thought you were into custom web site solutions and web site promotion.
If you are trying to pick a fight, you might want to spend a little more time thinking before you strike.
A Medical site, would most likely be a "custom web site" and the whole point of this board is discussing "web site promotions."
The post started out with a number of comments saying that the Internet and search engines are a "dog eat dog" world and if you can't beat them....join them!
Does Google really believe it has any chance of stopping spam and dubious SEO techniques related to SERPS? Think about it! If people can get away with "dubious" techniques in the commercial SERPS they will....they make money from it! What do you expect? A load of monks for webmasters?
The reason why Google can't win the spam war, or the "dubious" SEO technique war, is simple. The number of people prepared to throw away domains at manipulating search results is far more than the resources any search engine is prepared to put in place to combat it.
Logically the only way to combat all spam is to have human editors review all of the submissions to a search engine. This is simply because any algo can be manipulated and most good SEO's have dozens of ways to do so that no one else has even considered. When they get found there will be a dozen more.....
BUT, as we all know human editors don't work very well. Look at Yahoo, Looksmart and DMOZ for examples. The spiders work better, even though they let the spam techniques through on many occasions.
Inktomi doesn't seem to care about spam, cross linking, link farms, cloaking or any of the other shady techniques. It seems to have taken the attitude that most webmasters will only want to achieve high positions for terms that are relevant to their sites, so why not let them?
I don't want anyone visiting one of my sites who wasn't looking to buy. They cost me money in bandwidth, I only want the true prospects at my commercial sites.
Is a webmaster/SEO who tries to capture traffic using his/her time really any different from one that captures traffic using their pocket book and paid advertising?
If sites totally irrelevant to the search terms show up and are of an intentional but undesirable nature then maybe they can be "dumped". But these are few and far between, maybe porn and casinos and the biggest offenders looking for impulse sales. But not many folks buy on impluse. Some maybe offended and that is a factor to be considered, in numerous ways.
As for the rest, then if they are in someway relevant...why not let them in? Is it really such a hassle for a user to hit the back button if the site turns out to be something they don't want?
When I look through my cats there are numerous sites that are not what people are looking for based upon their search term. But these sites are harmless, many are government sites that just happen to have a few relevant words and a huge PR. Others are ISP's and cornerstones of the Internet that just happen to have the words included in their PR 9 and 10 pages. I don't care less about these sites, they aren't stealing any of my sales and the users are just hitting the back buttons when they reach those pages and moving on.
Google does a great job of indexing the web. Most of my personal searches are of a technical nature and 95% of the time Google returns exactly what I am looking for.
In the commercial cats I look at for the 300 sites I manage, some of the results are spammy, but they don't really take away any of the sales, they just consume some time of the prospects.....which in many ways helps!
Sometimes I think webmasters and SEO's miss something very important, a prospect will only buy from a site that delivers the goods. If the cat has 5 out of 10 spammy sites in it, they still won't buy, they will select one of the relevant sites 95%+ of the time instead.
That is why quality content really counts, not just because it helps with SERPS....it is crucial to sales.
Personally I have given up closely monitoring SERPS, now I just look at visitors and sales, afterall in a commercial category what else is important?
Monitoring top SERPS are largely for people who are on an ego trip, rarely do they have anything to do with the success of the site :)
The most common term used in my cat actually accounts for 6.7% of all visitors and 3.2% of all sales. I used to be worried about being numero uno in the SERPS, now I'm only worried about being numero uno for sales!
At the end of the day "spammy" sites are an inconvenience to users, not site owners and webmasters. I have actually seen an increase in conversion rate and sales since a few spammers entered my playing field.....the spammers occupy the time of the prospect and that makes them all the more willing to buy when they find the site that has the real goods.:)
if you don't like the results, by all means report the site and give good reasons, but:
a) don't expect competitors to be removed - search engines will want to automate spam traps to save costs, so they'll be looking at the overall effects of trapping each type of spam and how severely the SERPs will be affected - many innocent sites will be borderline already and tweaking a spam trap very slightly might cause massive change - search engine people will look at how severe the spam problem is across all SERPs to find the best way to tackle it
b) think about whether it's worth your time reporting it - your time may be better spent building more good quality content - "content is king" may be OLD, but it works - the more good quality content you have, the more search terms your site will be found for - keep building the content and you'll stay up there with the spammers - when they fall, you'll be top -
c) "It's bad karma. What goes around - comes around." - you grass up your competitors, they'll be mighty p*ss*d - they may not know you grassed them, but they'll be angry just cos they got the boot - look at the angry posts in this forum from people with PR0 penalties etc - they don't look to fix their sites, they look at what's wrong with their competitors sites then run off to report them - you might think your site is squeaky clean and it may well be squeaky clean, but the spammer that got the boot may well report it as spam anyway - they have nothing to lose so if they'er gonna fall, why not take a few others with them?
and what about encouraging competitors to join forces and remove a cheat? (ie, what darnbarn did). IMO, bad move, highly dangerous. if it works, great, but then you make your competitors aware that they can remove the competition without doing any real work. you suddenly become a target yourself. not just the target of one or two webmasters, but the target of several webmasters. whether you run a squeaky clean site or not, they'll think of something to report your site for - it's in their interests to do so. if you want to report a competitor, do it yourself and never get competitors to help you.
Although you may get good results for a limited time, you may as well flush your domains down the toilet WHEN (and not if) GoogleBot finds the cross-linking network.
Yes, there are always sites that seem to get away with things for months and months - but believe me, sooner or later they will be noticed and chucked out. And when they do, your site will overtake theirs in the rankings on a more permanent basis! ;)
Maybe I'm confused here, but
you said: "a) don't expect competitors to be removed - search engines will want to automate spam traps"
then
"b) think about whether it's worth your time reporting it "
and then explained that even if you're clean, your competitors "can remove the competition without doing any real work"
So let me get this straight, it may be a waste of my time to report them, I should spend my time developing content on my one website. If I decide to waste my time and put together a report of their multiple cross linking scheme, google probably won't do anything about it anyway, but, my competitors can have me removed without doing any work, even if I'm totally complying with all of the rules.
hmm...
I don't care if Google Guy gives me a written guarantee that cross-linking is okay: I'll never, ever, ever cross-link again.
