Naughty websites

[Essel]

Two of my competition imploy VERY naughty tactics and clearly in breach of the google guidelines.

I'm mainly talking about hidden text, or text that is only just off the background colour.

Now I have reported the two sites in question many many times over a period of several months. I hoped with the new google spambot and the latest dance they would drop. However they didn't.

This really annoys me as I'm a good guy, but in the index they beat me on every keyword.

Is there anyone I can contact directly? Or anyone on these forums that can help?

[Nick_W]

How to Fry Your Competition

1. Submit their sites to as many GB's FFA's and Link Farms as possible
   
2. Create Link Farms and link them to your competition
   
3. Use The correct form [google.com] IN ALL CAPS FROM AN AOL ISP ADDY
   
4. Come back and brag about it at WebmasterWorld - Everyone loves a snitch ;)

Nick

[pixel_juice]

>>Wait, why is this in the cloaking forum?

Cos it wouldn't have passed the Google News pre-moderation? :)

>>Why else would someone get so upset by the idea of others spending the time to report known spam techniques?

Because there have been hundreds of identikit posts about essentially the same thing. As Nick said "If you're going to do it, do it.". Because there's enough information on this site for you to beat your competitors without having to resort to trying to get them kicked out of the index.

For those who make 'clean' sites and will maintain that it isn't a level playing field, level it and use the 'naughty' techniques, or play somewhere else ;)

The real question is not 'does the site use hidden links?' but 'is the site relevant to the query and useful to the searcher?'.

lol Nick, you really don't like the spam report question :)

[Essel]

The real question is not 'does the site use hidden links?' but 'is the site relevant to the query and useful to the searcher?'.

So you're saying that it's ok to use hidden links/keywords etc as long as the site is relevent to the search terms you are "spamming"?

[DaveN]

SEO - Search Engine Optimisation

Optimisation :
The procedure or procedures used to make a system or design as effective or functional as possible

If Hidden Text or Hidden links make a system more effective then it's SEO.

At the end of the day what is the difference between hiding 100 keywords in hidden text so that you want hurt your design and changing the look of h1 tags so not to hurt your design.

DaveN

[ShawnR]

Hmmm, Nick, you've been quite a stirrer in this thread (not sure if that is just an Aussie term, but I'm sure you get what I mean)

You've given some great insights that I have learnt from (e.g. "...On page factors are just not worth spit these days..."). And your dry sarcasm through this thread has given me a good laugh, and I needed it as I've had a long day, so thanks! But laughing aside, I must take you to task on a couple of small issues:

• I must admit to reporting spam on 2 occasions. Both times the spammer was in an industry totally different to mine; not a competitor at all. Both times I reported the spam because it pissed me off that the spammer wasted my time when I was trying to find some information. Both times the spam was absolutely blatent (e.g. just keywords mixed in with random words, not even making sentences)... I didn't even look at their source. Both times I did not report the spam anonymously (I included my name in the report). My point? The form is there to help Google improve, and is used not just by jealous SEO'ers.
  
• The sarcasm about good samaratanism and tallying the effort (and hence $ cost) is something I just don't get. Different people invest their effort in improving the web in different ways. Participation in WebmasterWorld is an example. Reporting spam is another.
  

Again, thanks for the laugh! You are still my CSS hero!

(PS I only read this thread because the subject sounded a bit Riske ;)

[edited by: ShawnR at 11:37 am (utc) on June 24, 2003]

[Monkscuba]

"For those who make 'clean' sites and will maintain that it isn't a level playing field, level it and use the 'naughty' techniques, or play somewhere else"

No, no, no.

There are rules of engagement in the SEO war, and they are clearly stated. Google asks you to report hidden text and other spa-am. We attempt to make things fair by reporting naughty sites, not by doing the same things ourselves.

Imagine a world class athlete who finishes second in the Olympic Games. The winner is a drug taker, but is not caught. Should we say to the loser, go ahead and take drugs too to level the playing field, or should we tighten the testing for performance enhancing drugs?

[pixel_juice]

So you're saying that it's ok to use hidden links/keywords etc as long as the site is relevent to the search terms you are "spamming"?

"For those who make 'clean' sites and will maintain that it isn't a level playing field, level it and use the 'naughty' techniques, or play somewhere else"

No, no, no.

Let's get some things clear. I am not advocating or denouncing anyone's methods of promoting their site. As I said above, 'live and let live'. It isn't for me or anyone else on this forum to lay down the law on what is acceptable and what isn't. In the case of Google, it's entirely up to them, and they are not especially clear on the subject. Or if they are clear about what is spam and what isn't then the SERPS certainly aren't.

I also did not say that the only way to get good rankings is by using 'spamming' techniques, whatever that might mean. However, in the past I've been told that 'if the terms are competitive' or 'if this' and 'if that', then it is not possible to beat sites that are 'spamming'. Basically, in the past i've been told that you can't win unless you use 'spam' techniques.

This hasn't been my experience, but many people believe this to be true. So, assuming that you can't beat the spammer 'ethically' then either you will always be buried in the serps, or you wait and wait for the google spam reporting system (lmao) to kick out your rivals. In the meantime, what are you going to do to get visitors to your site? Twiddle your thumbs and keep hitting the spam report button until something happens? Maybe waste a bit of time complaining about it all being unfair.

I posted above how funny I found it that my competitors might be wasting their time looking through my source code for 'spam'. Because hidden text, links etc. are mostly pointless and can easily be replicated using 'ethical' techniques. In fact I find this whole discussion to be rather pointless. The SEO rules of engagment are demonstrated in the serps, not on the Google webmasters page.

Before anyone starts jumping up and down and waving spam-pointing fingers at me, please bear in mind that you know nothing about the sites I promote or the techniques I use to get them there. Believe it or not, I consider spam to be fair game, if only because I have personally found few problems in beating the spam techniques that, at the end of the day, are just emulating what Google is looking for in a high quality site.

[Nick_W]

The SEO rules of engagment are demonstrated in the serps, not on the Google webmasters page.

Well said. That's worth seeing twice ;)

Nick

[DaveN]

There are rules of engagement in the SEO war, and they are clearly stated.

Dam Right they are, But remember Google isn't an SEO they are the battle field, Report all you like but next month another will jump above in the serps and another and another until you realise what the rules if engagement are. imho

Dave

[AAnnAArchy]

Awww, man, I was looking for something really naughty. You know, like stuff I'd have to hide under my bed.

[mil2k]

2 Create Link Farms and link them to your competition

Actually there are some very good variations to this method :)

1) and 3) are not worth the effort. There are some very good Alternative methods available in this forum itself but gladfully Brett is Aware of them and has put a lid on them :)

Believe it or not, I consider spam to be fair game, if only because I have personally found few problems in beating the spam techniques that, at the end of the day, are just emulating what Google is looking for in a high quality site.

Fair Enough.

To all those complaining about SPAM I would say think of ways to defeat them. On page text is not so important these days as nick says.

I am glad Nick you don't Venture out much in Forum 3. Your threads would be second only to the update threads :)

[worker]

To those that consider hidden text and hidden links to be fair, even though those techniques have been spelled out at inappropriate by Google, I hope you are prepared to see your sites dissappear when they are reported and Google removes them.

You can rationalize your behavior any way you like, but the bottom line is that if you don't play by the rules, you will be kicked out of the game.

It's pretty simple.

[DXL]

I personally throw text with the same color as the BG somewhere at the top of the page of at least a good number of websites that I've done. I started doing it because yahoo was indexing sites I did with any line snatched from the index page. I took the same line I use as my description meta tag and put it somewhere on the top of the page. Once that happened, the yahoo descriptions were what I wanted them to be. I honestly haven't seen this improve the site rankings. I'm somewhat grimey, though, if you told me that this improved my rankings I'd probably do it for all my sites. I don't mind pulling a Sammy Sosa if I know any of my other competitors can do the same thing.