There was a good question asked a while back and I did not see an answer, it is something I am curious about too. If these proxies only have 1 or 2 or 10 backlinks then how do they manage to rank higher than the original site which has 10's of k's of backlinks? thanks
If you will see Dirsensei was penalised just at the opening of this thread. But if you look at it closely most of the major business sector of Dirsensei, including its latest listings www.dirsensei.com/index.php?list=latest was cached on Aug 11. So if some are thinking that this is just recent they are mistaken. Aviva was not even ranking prior to that and it was Rand Fishkin that discovered it and Aviva just went done more after that the same as the first wave. But the proxy sites have always been there and never left but just got more indexed than the penalized directories itself.
Spot on and I'm on this big time looking for a solution. One thing I see emerging from my studies so far is that dupes penalized are hand manipulated by Google, (I am just guessing here). Older well established directories that are the victim of these hacks are repreaved as the proof of establishement is already there and archived, its the newbie victims that appear to be getting hit which is bang out of order. I'm with you on any work we can do to get rid of these shitheads.
I'm sorry but I fail to see a connection between an inner page cache date and the loss of rank for that site's homepage. The cache date for the homepage was 26th of Sept. How do you connect the dots? As for Aviva's rankings, they were explained at the time as having been recently changed and I won't even waste my breath (typing fingers) on Rand Fishkin. You are 100% correct that proxy sites have always been there, but I have never once come across a cached copy of a site in Google on the 1st page for any search term until after the Google Hacking article was published, now all of a sudden they are everywhere. Furthermore, I am still at a loss to explain why anybody would want to use a proxy to visit a single web directory because there is really very little to hide from, let alone so many proxies and so many directories all in a short space of time PLUS the fact that the links have now appeared to these cached sites. But I am interested in hearing more about your reasons behind the Google's cache dates.
Does Google use its tool bar to track sites visited? Someone suggested they did in another thread. If it is correct would this be enough to trigger a back link to cached pages where a user makes legitimate use of a proxy service?
I beleive that it is in part due to the fact that the entire site is replicated, multiple times. It could also be a kickback from the doorway page penalties. But I cannot answer the question and niether could the folks who posted the original article IIRC. I also agree with what someone else posted in that these proxies only have good rankings because of the penalties already applied to the primary site. Lets say in simple terms that proxy site a, b and c contributed to get the primary site with a penalty and then d was considered in Google's eyes to be original content. But that really is just a theory.
Good question, yes Google does use it's toolbar to collect data but only if you specifically allow them to when installing it. However I am sure I read about a test quite a while ago about a guy who setup a site and visited it with his toolbar daily to see if it attracted the spiders, the end result was no. It may even have been on Cutt's blog but I honestly can't recall.
I am also at a loss on why this is happening. Qoobe was once got penalised and it came back same as Noble Directory. Let us see some of Dirsensei last cached and if you look at the other first wave latest links most are not even cached anymore. Dirsensei Shopping http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cach...ng/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a Dirsensei Business http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cach...ss/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a But if you go to Dirsensei Sports http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cach...ts/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a Its just recent, I am confused too.
I know of two directories both offer free and paid link submissions, both were ranking on the first page for their names. Niether of them has ever purchased a link to promote them, gain PR, game Google, etc, etc. Yet one has the "penalty" and one does not. I just checked the cache dates and they pretty much tally with the results for Dirsensei. So I am not sure there is much we can learn from the dates. Also, FYI (everyone) these two sites are the reason that I do not subscribe to the "paid link" penalty. There is something else involved here, whether that be proxy hacking, manual intervention by Google, an algo gone bad or something else entirely. And no I wont name the sites Ok, I'm done in this thread for a while, I need to get some work done
Too bad Google do subscribe to the paid link penalty or so it seems and we as mere mortals don't make any difference.
Is this holds true, I will have big laugh at those so called "seo expert" (one in particular) and their explanation for what's happening to some directories. Let's not forget the others too (this is important)!!! Now that we know a few sites with this issues, I would think with some testing they would improve their rankings and # of pages index, right?
Going back to my previous question. Is it not feasible that this is damage control and is it possible that this is what's been keeping certain people so busy? Everyone knows why the sites that got hit, got hit. Everyone knows that what they were doing was wrong and nothing is ever going to change that. If there is any substance to the belief that there is more to this than meets the eye and that the drop in the serp's was not penalty driven then it would follow that each and everyone of the sites that has been penalised would have to be the victim of the same hostile proxy attack. Is this the case? If not I think one should question why anyone would waste their time and resources attacking sites that Google has already whacked. Wish there was that tip toe icon I could use. I can already feel the heat of those reds coming my way.
What do you mean was wrong. So far I have not seen customers complaining and asking for a refund from this guys, but if they do I think the owner will do something about it according to their guidelines and in timely manner. If I'm not mistaken two things they were doing 1. buying too many links in a short period of time (advertising) 2. Asking for a review fee to be listed on their directory (selling a service). Is this wrong for YOU? Just think for moment about my question (forget about google for now), I just having a hard time understanding your point of view. Do we label any directory "bad" just because they were doing the above. All I see is that these people are running a business and google don't like their methods. So google can have its way and directory owners their own. CASE CLOSED Most of these directories are top quality directories and they are trying to be the best in this business, no doubt about it. Let's open our thinking, see the future, and the endless possibilities that directory can do for your website independent of Google or any other search engine. Why do we have to play with the rules of a 10 year old kid (Google) ehehhee, don't worry I don't waste my time doing that. .
We could begin with selling PR? But lets rather start another thread for that where we can encourage everyone who believes that selling PR is OK. They can all say their say and we will see if they get taken out by Google or by the poisoned proxy phantom. My question still stands. If every penalised site is not the victim of a proxy attack could this not be an attempt at damage control and could it not be self inflicted.
enlighten me since i guess i am not falling in this 'everyone knows' category of yours. i'll read your asininity later on this morning.
workshop is obviously here to troll and sling sh*t in every direction. One look at his/her profile and post history will quickly show you that 99.95% of his/her posts are in the directory-flame-wars threads. What conclusion can we draw from this?
Confirm shackle for "of course its possible. I have been in this game long enough to know that even I could do it". If you want a punch up start another thread and I will oblige or are you just trying to club this one to death. My question still stands. If every penalised site is not the victim of a proxy attack could this not be an attempt at damage control and could it not be self inflicted?
Sorry I don't understand your question. Your asking me that if my theory is proved incorrect, then everything I posted was some sort of attempt at damage control?