1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Directory Penalzation Round 2

Discussion in 'Directories' started by Dave E, Sep 25, 2007.

  1. CanadianEh

    CanadianEh Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,812
    Likes Received:
    380
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #101
    Since it doesn't seem to be affecting all the directories there is a real chance that it is not the real cause. It may be a contributing factor but nobody will know until someone does some research. Some of us are here to learn, including myself.
     
    CanadianEh, Oct 2, 2007 IP
    EveryQuery likes this.
  2. SilkySmooth

    SilkySmooth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #102
    The problem is that Google doesn't appear to be recognising content by date. Everyone is under the misconception that if Site A publishes an article 3 months ago and Site B publishes it 2 months later that Google will automatically credit Site A. Whilst that is what should happen it clearly isn't working like that in their algo.

    Also mikey's example was simplified, the problem is not strictly Google trying to determine whether Aviva should be given priority over a proxy site that has duplicated it's content and has obtained a few backlinks. But moreover Google trying to give priority to Aviva over potentially hundreds of these proxy cached sites.

    Yes it would take a number of resources to be able to pull something like this off and it is most definetly black hat, but it is none the less what is happening (I don't mean strictly to directories but to any site) and Google knowing about it means nothing. They have known about the Paid links problem and the MFA problem for just as long, if not longer and both of those problems still exist.
     
    SilkySmooth, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  3. workshop

    workshop Guest

    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #103
    Why would anyone go to all this trouble and expense? Is it not possible to identify parties involved?
     
    workshop, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  4. threebuckchuck

    threebuckchuck Peon

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    97
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #104
    Answer by: pctec :D
    I am SURE it's possible to find out the parties involved but here we go again, who will pay for that?
     
    threebuckchuck, Oct 2, 2007 IP
    EveryQuery likes this.
  5. workshop

    workshop Guest

    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #105
    Doesn't Aviva have access to the resources and skills needed to to identify whoever is behind this? Is it not in their interests to make this information public? Where is Aviva? What are they doing to restore confidence in their directories? Have they made any public statements?
     
    workshop, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  6. threebuckchuck

    threebuckchuck Peon

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    97
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #106
    I guess I should have been more clear. This is based on the assumption that the proxy theory is the reason the SERPS are gone and nobody really knows the answer to that question now do they? :D So would you spend a buttload of money to find something out that may or may not be the reason? I sure as hell wouldn't but I'm a cheap bastard! :D

    BTW: Why should Aviva or any one person/directory owner shoulder the responsibility of finding out who these creeps are? Perhaps you may want to PM Jeff and offer to do some fund raising for him because I'll tell ya, it ain't gonna be cheap to find them!
     
    threebuckchuck, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  7. pctec

    pctec Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Likes Received:
    210
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    160
    #107
    I think we may be brothers :p
     
    pctec, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  8. workshop

    workshop Guest

    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #108
    Sorry if I am not up to speed but I am keen to learn like everyone else. I am assuming that "someone" is trying to take advantage of Aviva's fall from grace, but why? Is it traffic? What have they got to gain? Surely the domains they are using are throw away domains with no long term value. Then if it is as difficult to trace surely its just as expensive to set up and execute. Again why?

    Finally what costs are involved in exposing and dealing with the scam? If there are hundreds of domains hosting that duplicate content surely it would be possible and relatively simple to get a court order to follow up with the domain registrar and either identify or kill them at source?
     
    workshop, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  9. jminscoe

    jminscoe Peon

    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    119
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #109
    here is some info about proxy
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server
     
    jminscoe, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  10. SilkySmooth

    SilkySmooth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #110
    workshop, if you really want to learn about this issue try reading the article that has been posted several times on the forum in recent days. It is nothing to do with throw away domains or traffic (directly). And of course it's difficult to trace, they are proxy sites, the whole reason for their existense is to hide your identity.

    If I am ranked 11th for a search term and I use this hacking method to penalise all of the sites ahead of me then I have a gain.

    And stop with your fixation on Aviva, it is getting real boring and there are more important issues to discuss.
     
    SilkySmooth, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  11. workshop

    workshop Guest

    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #111
    The stuff I have read so far is obscure but I will go through the whole thread. On the question of Aviva all the latest posts refer to the site so aplogies I didnt realise that it was a shared problem. Am I correct in saying that you believe that the reason the sites dropped in the serp's is because of the hostile proxy attack rather than a manual penalisation by Google? I assume this is the case because there wouldnt be much sense in attacking a penalised site or would there?
     
    workshop, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  12. SilkySmooth

    SilkySmooth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #112
    You don't need to read the entire thread, the thread took a different course when malcolm1 posted about the fact that we were looking into this, CanadianEh followed up with a request for more info as and when we had it to which I replied.

    It all started in a seperate thread when Dave_E reported that a search for "aviva directory" showed up a proxy site with a cached version and it span out from that. Another memeber posted the article, I spent the best part of a day reading through it and digesting the information and conducting some basic research. I followed up with my results in an earlier post in this thread.

    I am not out right saying that this IS what caused the "penalty" I am saying that it is a possibility, but regardless the research is just as important because none of us should want our web sites of any type being duplicated throughout the internet. If it is possible for our sites to obtain penalties from this Google hack then we should be protecting ourselves regardless of whether or not it applies to the current "penalty".
     
    SilkySmooth, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  13. threebuckchuck

    threebuckchuck Peon

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    97
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #113
    As said above and said by many many people before, NOBODY knows the reasons yet and probably never will unless Google tell us. Until then it is ALL irresponsible speculation. (Detroit people will get it) :D
     
    threebuckchuck, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  14. SilkySmooth

    SilkySmooth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #114
    I am not from detroit so I didn't look, but the information I am posting is not speculation it is based on fact and lots of hours research.
     
    SilkySmooth, Oct 2, 2007 IP
    threebuckchuck likes this.
  15. pctec

    pctec Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Likes Received:
    210
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    160
    #115
    The reason you didn't realize is because you came here with your own agenda...
    You had your mind made up about "us" and the "directory industry" the minute you started posting here...

    I call it like I see it brother...
     
    pctec, Oct 2, 2007 IP
    jg123 likes this.
  16. threebuckchuck

    threebuckchuck Peon

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    97
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #116
    Believe me, I am not going to pretend I know anything more than the next guy about this stuff but I appreciate your effort and respect your opinion's. That said, are you saying for a FACT this is the issue (the proxy thing) and not some sort of penalty? Curiosity killed the cat and I think I may be next! :eek:
     
    threebuckchuck, Oct 2, 2007 IP
    The Pheonix likes this.
  17. workshop

    workshop Guest

    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #117
    I am trying to simplify this so I can understand it and I hope you will bear with me. In the case of www.schoolsurf.org and www.bhomiyo.com how do they fit into the puzzle? Are they legitimate? As far as I am aware my ISP uses a proxy server to cache pages to save bandwidth and I assume that there is an address pointing to those pages which reads www.isp.com/proxy/page . Is that correct? Is this sort of cache part of the problem? If a hostile proxy is something completely different surely it still has to have an IP address and a physical presence.
     
    workshop, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  18. SilkySmooth

    SilkySmooth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #118
    No I am not saying that at all, I am saying that the information have posted is either based on fact (i.e. the fact that it is possible to hack Google using proxies, the fact that they know about it, the fact that they have done nothing about it for over a year) or is based on my research (the fact that the directory "penalty" problems started a couple of weeks after the article was published, the fact that practically every "penalised" directory researched thus far has proxy cached copies of their data in the search engine results).
     
    SilkySmooth, Oct 2, 2007 IP
  19. The Pheonix

    The Pheonix Banned

    Messages:
    1,233
    Likes Received:
    96
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #119
    I tend to agree with you popotalk, its nothing to do with algo's, it might not even be to do with link buying and selling, we honestly dont' know, so your theory its handpicked could be the case just as much as the others.

    Sorry to hear about your own demize but knowing you it will be a minor ripple in the sea of life. (Christ I'm a philosopher now! OMG) ;)
     
    The Pheonix, Oct 2, 2007 IP
    threebuckchuck and EveryQuery like this.
  20. SilkySmooth

    SilkySmooth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #120
    Ok, the fact that these sites exist is not the problem, nor is it a problem that they cache the site similar to the way in which your ISP does. The problem or "hack" occurs when links are placed to this type of cache content: http://bhomiyo.com/en.xliterate/directoryshare.com

    Google, Yahoo, etc then follow the link spider the content and determine that it is duplicate content. Now imagine that on say a hundred proxies, with a hundred back links to each proxy each with a cache of my site. And note that it is the entire site, because all of the links are prefixed with the cache url. So Google isn't just finding a single duplicate page, they are finding an exact replica of your entire site.

    That is the difference between a proxy and your ISP because I am sure your ISP doesn't post links, nor publish address's to it's cached content.

    This is why I have started this thread to allow us to work together as a group and stop them from caching our content. I have posted an IP banning solution, ! Ask ! has posted a phpLD mod solution and another member is working on a 'noindex' solution although I don't know if that will be publicly offered or not.
     
    SilkySmooth, Oct 2, 2007 IP