Can Google Kill Spam This Year?
- Thread starter jboeckman
- Start date
I can't wait till they work on this relevancy thing.
I'm buying domains like crazy in anticipation. I know I can't be the only one out there with the ability to produce readable contextual articles automatically without foot prints.
It's all a big video game, one with a high level of knowledge required to play.
I'm buying domains like crazy in anticipation. I know I can't be the only one out there with the ability to produce readable contextual articles automatically without foot prints.
It's all a big video game, one with a high level of knowledge required to play.
I don't know, maybe they are getting too much credit. Wouldn't have been difficult to take down the various blog networks that were widely discussed and easily accessible. I didn't receive a message, but didn't they send out 700,000 messages in a few months?! Looks like a desperate move on their part. My rankings suffered from a blog network getting hit, but these rankings are now back on the rise from using techniques not openly discussed much on the various forums. You just have to be a bit smarter with how you approach link building and be willing to spend more cash to get you there these days. There's still a ridiculous amount of spam in the SERPS. If you look at car insurance, payday loans etc... every one of them is spamming their way to the top. It all comes down to who has the deepest pockets. Same shit, different day.
if they are trying to kill spammy sites they already failed badly, I got a client site that has 200+ pages indexed and had about 8 top (1-2) ranking for different keywords (all services/products they offer), and the site dropped (on the 18th) on all but 2 keywords - to the 2-4 page.
one site that is outranking my client is a EMD dot net, with 8 pages (all from 2009), non original content (about 250 words per page) with 8 root domains linking and about 300 links total, its a thin, slow (on reseller) and poor information site that is outranking a bunch of heavy, content rich sites.
if you want to blame anything, its probably SB and Google had enough of that because a software that costs under $100 and does such damage is not something they can live with, cheap links are worth very little right now, heavy solid authority links... now that is a different story. And I would try to stay away from buying links from link brokers any time soon.
one site that is outranking my client is a EMD dot net, with 8 pages (all from 2009), non original content (about 250 words per page) with 8 root domains linking and about 300 links total, its a thin, slow (on reseller) and poor information site that is outranking a bunch of heavy, content rich sites.
if you want to blame anything, its probably SB and Google had enough of that because a software that costs under $100 and does such damage is not something they can live with, cheap links are worth very little right now, heavy solid authority links... now that is a different story. And I would try to stay away from buying links from link brokers any time soon.
{Until you test it yourself your opinion is worthless.|If you knew anything about real SEO you'd already know the answers.}
any proof of this, or just a feeling you have?
I've got a site on the front page of G right now that I ranked entirely with SB to test out this "shitty links" idea...It's been rising steadily through the SERPS for two months. Totally unaffected by any of the recent algo changes.
I don't think they will elimnate, but I think they will be able to neutralize it. If they simply made profile backlinks give negative effects on SEO then people will just abuse that on competitors, but if they make the value of the links worth very little (generally for new sites) then I think they can filter out sites properly.
Can Google make what currently works, stop working?
Yes, absolutely.
Can Google stop anybody from gaming their systems, permanently?
No, any more than Microsoft can release software that will never need security holes patching. The insurmountable obstacle for them both is that they are providing complex solutions to complex problems, and that leads to gaps.
It's like the tax system. They clamp down on certain avoidance techniques today, but open up more holes that motivated people can exploit tomorrow. A one page tax code that says "everyone pays 10% of everything they earn, no exceptions" would end that, but it would unworkable for many other reasons.
Where's there an algorithm (or a statute book), there's an exploit. It will always be far easier to attack systems (and BH SEO is essentially an attack on G's algorithm) than it is to build attack-proof systems.
This holds true unless you make the system mind-bendingly simple. Which will never happen, because large organisations can only increase complexity by their very nature.
Yes, absolutely.
Can Google stop anybody from gaming their systems, permanently?
No, any more than Microsoft can release software that will never need security holes patching. The insurmountable obstacle for them both is that they are providing complex solutions to complex problems, and that leads to gaps.
It's like the tax system. They clamp down on certain avoidance techniques today, but open up more holes that motivated people can exploit tomorrow. A one page tax code that says "everyone pays 10% of everything they earn, no exceptions" would end that, but it would unworkable for many other reasons.
Where's there an algorithm (or a statute book), there's an exploit. It will always be far easier to attack systems (and BH SEO is essentially an attack on G's algorithm) than it is to build attack-proof systems.
This holds true unless you make the system mind-bendingly simple. Which will never happen, because large organisations can only increase complexity by their very nature.
Does anyone think Google will focus it's de-spamming war on specific niches, namely the money niches?
Anyone know if there is a correlation between say their spam-cleaning and the adwords value of a niche?
For an alternative opinion on the above you guys might find this post by Jonathan Ledger of interest The SEO sky is falling! (Yeah, again, really...) He references this article from seomoz How Google Makes Liars Out of the Good Guys in SEO .
Just sayin'.
Anyone know if there is a correlation between say their spam-cleaning and the adwords value of a niche?
For an alternative opinion on the above you guys might find this post by Jonathan Ledger of interest The SEO sky is falling! (Yeah, again, really...) He references this article from seomoz How Google Makes Liars Out of the Good Guys in SEO .
Just sayin'.
Afaik, the webspam team and the AdSense team couldn't pick each other out of a lineup.
Until Google eliminates the positive ROI of spamming it will never go away. I really doubt that will ever happen.
There will always be spam, plain and simple.
As mentioned above, if it penalizes spam excessively, then it opens up the ability to take down competitors by pointing spam links at them. So then skill and knowledge are thrown out the window and all one has to do to beat the competition is spam them.
As mentioned above, if it penalizes spam excessively, then it opens up the ability to take down competitors by pointing spam links at them. So then skill and knowledge are thrown out the window and all one has to do to beat the competition is spam them.