Legendarystreams
New Member
No, it's not the last new one, it's the new new one 
From what I am understanding, they are changing several things in their importance structure, sort of going to a weighted linking system. Basically they're looking to make the system "truly democratic," or something similar. This impacts link exchanges most severely. I.E. if you have links to a site in a table along with other links and these sites in return have a similar system, it is noted as a link exchange and thus weighted less than a link in the middle of a paragraph.I believe this information to be accurate, but am looking for comments and verification.Hey Apostle...Sounds like a nice idea...but wouldn't it be easy for linkers to now create a short paragraph and include a link in the middle of the text.....a bunch of these links would then appear to be a page of text with links inline.From what I have been reading it seems that there is a glitch in Google's filtering process. You can fool the filter and retrieve accurate results by using the exclusion operator ( - ) on dummy words that you know will not exist in the SERs. Here's an example with dummy words: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... fjh+-dtrheSample without dummy words: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... gle+SearchAs you can see the results are very different. Sadly The trick to using the dummy words is that if your key phrase is 3 words long you have to use 3 dummy words as exclusions and so on. Single word searches do not seem to be effected by the filter.The filter glitch is happening when Google is post processing the results from it's DB. There are spam sites that are causing the filter to crash and thus truncating the results that are returned.You can verify this by using http://www.scroogle.org to see what should have been returned from you search.Here's the article from Seth Finkelstein on Google's SPAM filtering. http://sethf.com/anticensorware/general/google-spam.phpJust hope you are not the one causing the "Google NACK"!The Apostle of God wrote:Quote:Looks like anchor text in the new King...."In an effort to weed out the noise, Google constantly refines its weighting algorithm, which it says is a combination of a hundred different factors. In an attempt to thwart deliberate gaming by link farms and blog noise (exacerbated by lossy software gimmicks such as 'Trackbacks', which generate reams of content-free pages for Google's crawlers), Google has stepped back from its trademarked PageRank? method and instead, emphasized more traditional factors such as anchor text. "Note that there are factors...what else is considered traditional in the eyes of SEO?phaugh wrote:You can read the complete article here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/33325.htmlenjoyPS read the associated articles buy clicking on the anchor text that is in the article.....there's a lot of good info there!Thanks plaugh."... emphasized more traditional factors such as anchor text..."It just seems to me that anchored text, being part of a link, is also part of the PageRank system, and therefore, this is not news and not a change.In another forum, a poster started a new thread titled "This is what's happening at Google" and then in the post itself, quoted an article that sounded very authoritative. It really came accross as factual. I knew the author of the article from, yes even a different forum, and asked him where he got his facts. He said he drew his conclusions from reading other things on the internet, hahaha.It's all just speculation based on speculation. The articles sound more authoritative because the authors are better writers, but there's no more facts involved than right in the forums, which are 100% opinions.There is almost zero information available based on documented research.If you want to know what's going on with Google, you have to research your keywords yourself. You can see my research, but it's for my keywords, not yours. But, I know, research is tedious and boring and therefore webmasters will not get their own facts, they will continue to read the deliciously entertaining tabloids.Maybe I should start research business for webmaster. BompaIf you check the -googlegoo results closely you'll find they are not the same as last months SERPs and the non commercial searches that are meant to be identical (non commercial 'keyword -googlegoo' = 'keyword)' are not so the entire theory falls apart.google has shifted it's emphasis away from anchor text/PR towards on page factors and what we are seeing is the result. If you have an all round optimised site or one that was weak on anchor text you would of seen no chnages or improvements (I saw improvements).seo wrote:*reading some of the posts*did google get sued for changing they PageRank????
From what I am understanding, they are changing several things in their importance structure, sort of going to a weighted linking system. Basically they're looking to make the system "truly democratic," or something similar. This impacts link exchanges most severely. I.E. if you have links to a site in a table along with other links and these sites in return have a similar system, it is noted as a link exchange and thus weighted less than a link in the middle of a paragraph.I believe this information to be accurate, but am looking for comments and verification.Hey Apostle...Sounds like a nice idea...but wouldn't it be easy for linkers to now create a short paragraph and include a link in the middle of the text.....a bunch of these links would then appear to be a page of text with links inline.From what I have been reading it seems that there is a glitch in Google's filtering process. You can fool the filter and retrieve accurate results by using the exclusion operator ( - ) on dummy words that you know will not exist in the SERs. Here's an example with dummy words: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... fjh+-dtrheSample without dummy words: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... gle+SearchAs you can see the results are very different. Sadly The trick to using the dummy words is that if your key phrase is 3 words long you have to use 3 dummy words as exclusions and so on. Single word searches do not seem to be effected by the filter.The filter glitch is happening when Google is post processing the results from it's DB. There are spam sites that are causing the filter to crash and thus truncating the results that are returned.You can verify this by using http://www.scroogle.org to see what should have been returned from you search.Here's the article from Seth Finkelstein on Google's SPAM filtering. http://sethf.com/anticensorware/general/google-spam.phpJust hope you are not the one causing the "Google NACK"!The Apostle of God wrote:Quote:Looks like anchor text in the new King...."In an effort to weed out the noise, Google constantly refines its weighting algorithm, which it says is a combination of a hundred different factors. In an attempt to thwart deliberate gaming by link farms and blog noise (exacerbated by lossy software gimmicks such as 'Trackbacks', which generate reams of content-free pages for Google's crawlers), Google has stepped back from its trademarked PageRank? method and instead, emphasized more traditional factors such as anchor text. "Note that there are factors...what else is considered traditional in the eyes of SEO?phaugh wrote:You can read the complete article here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/33325.htmlenjoyPS read the associated articles buy clicking on the anchor text that is in the article.....there's a lot of good info there!Thanks plaugh."... emphasized more traditional factors such as anchor text..."It just seems to me that anchored text, being part of a link, is also part of the PageRank system, and therefore, this is not news and not a change.In another forum, a poster started a new thread titled "This is what's happening at Google" and then in the post itself, quoted an article that sounded very authoritative. It really came accross as factual. I knew the author of the article from, yes even a different forum, and asked him where he got his facts. He said he drew his conclusions from reading other things on the internet, hahaha.It's all just speculation based on speculation. The articles sound more authoritative because the authors are better writers, but there's no more facts involved than right in the forums, which are 100% opinions.There is almost zero information available based on documented research.If you want to know what's going on with Google, you have to research your keywords yourself. You can see my research, but it's for my keywords, not yours. But, I know, research is tedious and boring and therefore webmasters will not get their own facts, they will continue to read the deliciously entertaining tabloids.Maybe I should start research business for webmaster. BompaIf you check the -googlegoo results closely you'll find they are not the same as last months SERPs and the non commercial searches that are meant to be identical (non commercial 'keyword -googlegoo' = 'keyword)' are not so the entire theory falls apart.google has shifted it's emphasis away from anchor text/PR towards on page factors and what we are seeing is the result. If you have an all round optimised site or one that was weak on anchor text you would of seen no chnages or improvements (I saw improvements).seo wrote:*reading some of the posts*did google get sued for changing they PageRank????