It's official Google has opened up a can of whoop ass on directories

That's because the 'fence' is stuck up their a$$es hahaha

Don't worry malcolm, and pay no mind to them.

 

Seems yours has found its way back Biz-Dir Directory and also most off your indexed pages with this Tool

 

And therein lies the problem possibly - how many sitewides are "nofollow" at the moment?

 

It was just built a few days ago...

Got to get silkysmooth to make it "just front page" and id like to have it
display 5-10 scrolling 81 x 31 banners on the front page only and will offer
videos submission also hopefully tonite

It will be deleted (that sponcer mod) from the other pages shortly

thx
malcolm

 

Sitewide is not the only problem I'm sure.
It's even more because of interlinking.
Have my own experience with no-directories also websites, not buying, selling links, not offering adverts.

 

read about unintentional link bombing and then tell me sitewides don't work:
http://www.v7n.com/forums/seo-forum/66357-link-bombing-still-works.html

 

Nice find

Im just going by what he (matt) requested of most advertisers when he did his "paid links" post and
that is if your going to offer them sitewides then use "no follow" on the links. (No sitewides - No Issues)
I belive he was getting at the point that it tranfers PR and i guess thier really isnt much they can
do about it "other" then ask for thier algo's sake.

thx
malcolm

 

I respect your beliefs - but dont agree with them

If anyone needs me you can find me on page 1 (for 250 different KW's)

 

I usually bite my tongue but theres only half of it left now, next it seems Matt Cunts will be telling you what your girlfriends and wives can wear.

Its hilarious, comply or die? no way.

 

Do you allow spam sites that are so low quality that the only content on them is the anchor text to their affiliate links?

If not why not?

It's Google's game, they get to make the rules...as much as it can hurt any webmaster, if they want to be listed with decent SERP, then those rules need to be followed, it's really as simple as that.

EDIT: I got red repped here. I assume by someone that owns a site with such low quality that the only content on them is the anchor text to their affiliate links ~ lol

 

A valid point and i fully agree, i already bend over backwards with the rest to what i believe to be expected of us as webmasters but the point im making is theres complying, then theres just plain giving up all of your rights as a business man or woman.

Were respecting the search engines endlessly so why do they insist of having people jump through hoops when theres much worse being done out there on the internet.

Search engines are saturated with child porn, snuff, cannabalism, warez, terrorist propaganda, hacking, cracking..... ive seen a warez site with the so called Authority status, which of course now is being pointed out as not quite so.

If algorithims can be created to rearrange serps, surely algorithims can be created to rid the search engines of some of the above mentioned.

Search engines punish the small guy trying to get a few crumbs but no one questions why its so easy to purchase and view some of the above.

So its not really so simple.

 

I don't know, maybe those child porn sites are doing good at following the rules I mean, many are/were good enough to make it into DMOZ (and as such google).

Though, I do agree that there is a lot of trash that litters the SERP, and trash far worse then even a crap directory (not referring to directories in general, just the crap ones). I'd really rather click into some random site list (directory) then click into an affiliate scheme that has even less content then a page with links that might actually contain what I find.

 

read my blog which i wrote last night. it explains how i felt last night.

 

Qryztufre, maybe thats what it is, all the money that type of business makes affords better SEO specialists, maybe our directories are too clean?

Tell us what you like google? if Deaf Lesbians are your thing then we can provide that for you no offence to the Deaf and joking aside for a moment, it is getting out of hand.

If a directory owner or other webmaster has the money and people to promote their directory hard then they should not be punished for it, its like somebody reaches where they want to be in the search engines only for the whole lot to be wiped clean and interferring with the persons business.

So if you want to sell images and movies of kids being sexually abused and tortured then it appears they wont hurry themselves getting rid of that, their too busy messing with directories.

indyguidedotinfo, thanks, i read your blog post, an interesting read.

 

As long as they are promoting and not breaking any rules blatantly.
E.g - bidding directories are blatantly breaking the no paid links rule. The main page where people bid lots of money to be on looks exactly like the examples given by Google SPAM team.

 

"dude", then place a "nofollow"

 

A-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!

Now THAT is comedy!

 

this is what gogle needs to be looking out for

underage porn sites, warez sites, racist sites, militia type sites, gambling sites, pharmacy sites.. the list goes on.

Not directories . Directories are use at your own discrestion. They are not hurting anyone.

BTW.. I saw the google earth car today near my office taking pictures for google maps. I through a empty soda bottle at them. ' thats right im hardcore!!'

 

In many ways the Directory owner is interfering with Google's business, as there really is nothing natural about a directory submission...at least not when I can submit to hundreds in just a few clicks. Google is doing it's best to deliver quality organic SERP...and there is nothing organic about 99.9999% of the directories out there.

Promoting a site has nothing to do with gaining PR and everything to do with traffic. How much traffic is there from directories that is not from directory owners?