vanishing PFI pages theory

you got reviewed, they found stuff they didn't like and you were penalized

[walkman]

normal sites have a 1 in whatever chance of getting flagged /reviewed. However, PFI ones had /have a 100% or close to it chance. This could be the alternative explanation. Depending on who is reviewing and with what rules, you can find something wrong with any site. Especially if the "design the site as if search engines didn't exist" rule is the standard.

I'm not saying it's right, wrong or that this really happened. Just guessing so don't shoot me.

[outland88]

Very likely too aggresive a filtering is in play. Remember though a lot of people have their eyes on what Yahoo is up to. There are a lot of smart people out there. You can only do sites poorly for so long before word spreads. Once word gets out that manual reviews by different people can lead to differing results its going to backfire on them. People will get tired of making changes that can hurt them in other engines. Its not smart marketing or a very good business practice to be manually reviewing and nit-picking these penalized sites to death.

Business people will tire of this foolishness and go where the value is.

[2_much]

Okay I think for a while we need to relax on this topic, it's been hashed, rehashed, hashed again and rehashed again, and then again.

Yahoo's aware of the situation as many many people here posted they had emailed them about it, and I'm sure they're working on it.

In the meantime, I would be really interested in comparing notes about what's working in the algo and trying to figure out how to make this new technology work for our businesses.