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.

Matt Cutts openly admits sites can be sabotaged by competitors (Google Bowling)

Discussion in 'Google' started by mvandemar, Jul 1, 2007.

  1. Big Zee

    Big Zee Active Member

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #41
    Have a look at my post above. If you have a site you can test it on then try nit out - I'm very sure it will work
    SEMrush
     
    Big Zee, Jul 8, 2007 IP
    SEMrush
  2. Codythebest

    Codythebest Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,764
    Likes Received:
    253
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    275
    #42
    There are dozens of techniques to sabotage websites...and everybody can do it easy...
     
    Codythebest, Jul 8, 2007 IP
  3. demacro

    demacro Peon

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #43
    yup u can do tht
     
    demacro, Jul 8, 2007 IP
  4. The Webmaster

    The Webmaster IdeasOfOne

    Messages:
    9,518
    Likes Received:
    717
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #44
    Someone tell that to ministrel ;)

    Its isnt very difficult even, with a determination to sabotage competitor, anyone can do it.
     
    The Webmaster, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  5. NetMidWest

    NetMidWest Peon

    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    151
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #45
    With the addition of penalties for paid links, Googlebowling has been made easier.
    Besides not actually having proof of the link being paid, they also have no idea of who paid for it...

    I'm suprised that 302 hijacks are not on the list...
     
    NetMidWest, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  6. imnajam

    imnajam Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    113
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    185
    #46
    In my view exploitation is always possible, the only difference is it's sometime unknown, anyways it's nice to know about competitors harming others.
     
    imnajam, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  7. malcolm1

    malcolm1 Prominent Member

    Messages:
    7,148
    Likes Received:
    758
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #47
    Hello..

    Well dont know if its true or not but i found this clown
    spamming (http://www. y08.net/index.html )and adding
    my site and a few other directory owners onto this page
    in an attempt too...?? Whatever

    His registrant (Go-daddy) was contacted as well google
    notified of whats happened so that we dont get burnt...

    thx
    malcolm
     
    malcolm1, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  8. BigBadWolf

    BigBadWolf Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    67
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    140
    #48
    He only confirmed what many already knew, and now with this link reporting BS is even easier to do :D
     
    BigBadWolf, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  9. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #49
    Yeah, guys... the news here isn't that sites can be bowled...

    The news here is that the head of Google's webspam initiative has come out of the closet and openly admitted that you can, without actually hacking into someone else's website, harm their rankings against Google's will.

    Now, he did of course, in normal Cutts fashion, immediately try and throw some fluff on it (Yes people, you can also harm sites by hacking them, but that's illegal, har har har), but not before dealing a serious blow to Google's trust and credibility.

    -Michael
     
    mvandemar, Jul 9, 2007 IP
    NetMidWest likes this.
  10. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #50
    Nice spin. But the fact remains that what Forbes says he said and what he actually said are not necessarily the same. If you have ever been interviewed for a newspaper or magazine story (as I have on several occasions), you'd know that even something appearing in quotes is often far from a verbatim quote and sometimes not even an accurate representation of what was really said.

    Rely on what Matt himself says, not on what someone else claims he said. And Matt himself has previously disputed claims made by Forbes reporters.
     
    minstrel, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  11. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #51
    Which means there is no reason to think that if this were inaccurate he wouldn't do the same again. He did not dispute this however.

    What he did do is toss some chaff in the air, in the hopes that people like... well, people like you*... would be distracted by the bright shiny bits and conveniently forget what he said in the first place, and then help to cloud the issues with others.

    I mean, c'mon, you're the one who quoted what he said, so I know you read it:

    What he did not say is "here are the only three", or hell, even "here are the three"... it was simple misdirection. He never once said that he was misquoted about it being possible to do purely through links. I mean, please, in the article that he commented in by Tamar it flat out states Google Bowling at the top as one of the methods... he's not denying it.

    -Michael

    *no offense
     
    mvandemar, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  12. sweetfunny

    sweetfunny Banned

    Messages:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    467
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #52
    If he was misquoted he would of blogged about it within hours to clear up any misconceptions.
     
    sweetfunny, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  13. Aztral

    Aztral Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    125
    #53
    We're talking Forbes here...not Star, or Enquirer.
     
    Aztral, Jul 9, 2007 IP
  14. tobto

    tobto Peon

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #54
    I suppose now 'almost perfect search' can distinguish spam from a not-spam
     
    tobto, Aug 14, 2008 IP
  15. sherry2008

    sherry2008 Guest

    Best Answers:
    0
    #55
    This is really a sad news. My 3 sites got penalized. May for this reason...:(
     
    sherry2008, Aug 20, 2008 IP
  16. lightlysalted

    lightlysalted Active Member

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    32
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #56
    the problem is that there is no way to stop competitors doing this, how could google tell? It's impossible. The best thing is just to keep building your site and try not to annoy your compeition, although i agree that it is problematic
     
    lightlysalted, Aug 20, 2008 IP
  17. AngelaE8654

    AngelaE8654 Active Member

    Messages:
    935
    Likes Received:
    27
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    85
    #57
    I agree. If someone's going to do all that work to sabatoge someone else's site, why bother? Why not work on their own backlink strategies instead?
    That's just crazy...
     
    AngelaE8654, Aug 20, 2008 IP