A site has a PR10 It has either done a brilliant job of fooling Google and Macromedia or a serious Programming error in the Reverse Algorithms has occurred momsinsex dot com Here is the linking information half the links are from Google and Macromedia This may be an example of Google Programming gone Awry So- don't feel too bad about any of your sites' links suddenly disappearing or SERPs changes - it may be reverse algo gone flaky http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=link:www.momsinsex.com PS: GOOGLE READS THIS FORUM - CAN'T YOU JUST SEE THEIR FACES NOW! (Sh-h-h ...of course, if you replicated their site for one update - you will get these results - but of course, none of you would do that - would you?)
One of our members plugged it here on this forum. Several forum members told him what they thought of post and I have not seen him online much of late. Would bet there was extreme black hat there. Shannon
It's because they are doing a 301 redirect to www.google.com when the Google spider comes (cloaking). http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=www.momsinsex.com Check it... Anyone can do it to make a PR10 page. Check the links between it and www.google.com, they are identical, because Google thinks they are the same. Does not help their actual ranking (in fact it hurts it because Google doesn't think they have any content because they are redirecting to Google).
Makes it scary for those people who buy PR links- atleast another thing to check into... would be easy enough to cloak a PR8 page so it wasn't *as* obvious.
well Id assume if someone knows about what PR means, they would oprobably know the link: command in google, so hopefully it doesnt work very often.
Nice cache... It's not that brilliant though. It's a known exploit of the G loophole where you either 301 or meta refresh to a site and hijack its PR and inherit its links. In some cases they actually steal your serps so by altering the refresh they can steal your traffic for some time. Very bad error in G's algo's which is taking an awful long time to be dealt with.
I visited the site and wondered why I kept getting google every time I clicked a link. I guess they don't have their code set to handle firefox and so I got the 301. Regarding the hijacking, I mentioned this some time ago. It looks like a serious issue and I don't know why G hasn't addressed the problem.
Well, unfortunately it's just a 301/2 - completely within standards (ie, in it's own right). And quite frankly, the WM is free to redirect to whomever he/she chooses. Imagine if G had to check them all.. it'd be like having to ask.. is that dhtml for legitimate purposes, or are they just hiding text ? It happens all the time - only now it seems to be a popular way to stiff PR suckers.. I reckon there's gotta be the odd chuckle floating around G's hallowed cubicles right now After all that - I gotta wonder why they bothered.
Meant this Topic as a joke - did not expect ANYONE to take it seriously http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:zhool8dxBV4J:www.google.com/+&hl=en all the web master did was replicate Google - See the "Cached" version link and see the SERPs
I agree the thread title is very misleading, a good issue to highlight though. The tactic displayed raises all sorts of issues that webmasters need to be mindful of. Some webmasters are clueless on this stuff and need to be shown the light.
So... if you gained high PR using this trick, and then swapped in actual content-rich pages, how long would it be between the time that your new content was indexed and given good SERPS and the time when your huge undeserved PR bonus disappeared?
IMO Will, you wouldn't get any good positions as none of that PR would be attributed to any of the internal pages for the simple reason that the bot would never have seen them. Its only reference points would be what it 'sees', and when it gets the new content, I believe that it would then see it for the domain + backlinks attributable to that specific , and not for the domain that it was cloaked-301'ed to. As for the green in the bar, I think it would stay there until an update, or until otherwise spotted. That site using the ploy, (maybe someone can check with a firefox googlebotted browser) is still using the 301. A look at its inner pages shows that none of the green stuff has flowed through. < not that I did that much looking of course >