Matt Cutts - is this true? Please tell me Google is not that bad!

Discussion in 'Google' started by web 24 7, Sep 26, 2007.

?

Should google declare the site with the highest PR as the document owner?

  1. NO, Who is indexed first is the document owner!

    47.5%
  2. NO, Who is linked to from the duplicates is the owner!

    10.2%
  3. NO, Linked to and earliest indexed date is the owner!

    15.3%
  4. YES, Whoever has the highest PR is the owner!

    1.7%
  5. NO, Who ever pays the most to goole god is the owner!

    1.7%
  6. ??, Ugh, they will never get it right anyway!

    40.7%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. sweetfunny

    sweetfunny Banned

    Messages:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    467
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #41
    No higher PR definately does not make you the owner, but it definately makes you rank higher then then the owner.
     
    sweetfunny, Sep 30, 2007 IP
  2. sundaybrew

    sundaybrew Numerati

    Messages:
    7,294
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    560
    #42
    That is an excellent point and I wish it wasn't true :(......but it is
     
    sundaybrew, Sep 30, 2007 IP
    Bender likes this.
  3. mark123456

    mark123456 Peon

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #43
    that ridiculous..google needs to fix this or plagirism will rule..that being said you cant run adwords on plagirized content..its a good way to lose your account
     
    mark123456, Sep 30, 2007 IP
  4. bpeh_cart

    bpeh_cart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #44
    i guess determining when an article is published can be tricky. say i have a software to mass distribute the article to ezine, articlecity, ...etc at the same time. they are all duplicates. original content is good but duplicates aren't. If you are google, what will you do? how can you be fair?
     
    bpeh_cart, Oct 1, 2007 IP
  5. web 24 7

    web 24 7 Peon

    Messages:
    313
    Likes Received:
    12
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #45
    Well this is the option that should rule.

    NO, Linked to and earliest indexed date is the owner!

    If the document is found earliest on a domain and many duplicates link back to it that is a vote of confidence.

    Now for me all this is simply theory until this is proved out in our first trial test, and this option is being tested because the article has been online for over a year and has many duplicate linking back to it, including the test duplicate.

    Duplicate Content Knock Out Experiment

    and many more test will follow to prove and disprove SEO theories.
     
    web 24 7, Oct 1, 2007 IP
  6. sweetfunny

    sweetfunny Banned

    Messages:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    467
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #46
    I totally agree as well, but you have to look at it in an overall perspective.

    Firstly it means Google would have to keep every cache snapshot of every document ever crawled. I think there's around 8 Billion documents cached by Google, so keeping every page ever cached over the years and it's modifications would result in trillions then the server resources required to check each cache against trillions would be huge.

    Take this thread for example, Google crawls it with 1 post and caches it. Comes back and there's 2 posts and caches it, times by 20 posts per page means keeping 20 page versions instead of the most recent.

    The Q3 Pagerank thread for example has 342 pages, so that many pages cached. If it kept every version it would have 6,838 versions of that thread. (This is assuming Google crawls the thread after every post)

    Then we have the scenario of which cached version does Google check against to determine if the document is duplicate? If a document changes significantly and i publish the old version elsewhere is it still duplicate content despite the fact the document does not exist at any other URL on the web for a user to read?

    What if the original no longer exists, or what if i loose my domain name and set-up the same site on a different URL? My second site wouldn't rank because Google says my new URL wasn't the first to publish the content.

    You are assuming everyone who scrapes content links back. As someone else mentioned which is a good point, alot of scraper sites are low authority MFA sites that generally won't outrank you.

    It's 100% fact, the first article was indexed on your site long before mine and in 10 hours i was beating it for exact terms in quotes.

    I've lost track of the clients who come to me saying, "I had an article on my site for 2 years, wanted some backlinks so i submitted it to a bunch of article directories now i've lost all trafic to it and EzineArticles are beating me".
     
    sweetfunny, Oct 1, 2007 IP
  7. Rasputin

    Rasputin Peon

    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    67
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #47
    On the other hand, it does mean that if you have a decent ranking site, you can grab new articles from ezinearticles etc and put them on your site and outrank both ezinearticles and the original article.

    I've done this a few times and yes it does work.:D

    So yes, someone could steal your content and outrank you.
     
    Rasputin, Oct 1, 2007 IP
  8. godmode

    godmode Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,453
    Likes Received:
    156
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    190
    #48
    Totally agree. I forgot to copy the example i saw while searching for some drupal tutorial.

    One guy written a drupal tutorial and exact page is syndicated by a large RSS site.

    The RSS site is ranking higher than the poor original author. :eek::mad:
     
    godmode, Oct 1, 2007 IP
  9. amnezia

    amnezia Peon

    Messages:
    990
    Likes Received:
    31
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #49
    I really haven't seen any evidence of this at all. Please provide some.
     
    amnezia, Oct 1, 2007 IP
  10. martialarm

    martialarm Peon

    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #50
    still ongoing..
     
    martialarm, Oct 16, 2007 IP