Matt Cutts says Co-op is bad???

Sorry Will, I wasn't aiming it at you, it was just a thought in genera. I should have made that more clear. I must have read your mention of 20k and it stuck in my mind without realising

My only rock in all this is my rugby forum that has not been involved in linking schemes, never linked to bad neighbourhoods etc, but got slammed (back up to over 10k pages again now though.

 

Forums worry me more than any other type of legitimate site with Google's new selective indexing scheme, because they have lots of pages and few inbound links.

Well, that and the fact that I'm building two of them.

 

coop has static links as well.

 

And how static are the Co-op links? - for one month or so max? And if Google only came around your site one a month, effectively such links would still be rotating. But more to the point, there are a number of senior people on this thread that have said that they personally are no longer using the co-op.

If it works for you, great.

 

You can show semi-static coop links on your site but google still knows what they are. The ads.digitalpoint.com if image is a dead giveaway.

Still no way for advertisers to make links static though.

 

There are plenty of rotating links (ads) on Yahoo.com. Will Google de-index Yahoo.com too?

 

We outta start a game of clue

 

Google needs to show the leading sites to its searchers. If you search for a bank and don't see the banks you expect then google has failed.

 

eBay is worse. At least with forum links you generally can stumble upon something useful and helpful. With eBay's indexed links you end up at auctions that do not exist.

Wonder why eBay does not get baned?

 

Why Your Google Indexed Page Count is Down - BigDaddy Analysis By Matt Cutts

Matt Cutts has provided a detailed timeline related to the BigDaddy update in his blog. He also gives us insights into why certain webmasters might be seeing a reduction in their indexed page count.

Here are some key points from this detailed blog entry by Matt:

• Google is not "running out of space"
• BigDaddy was first deployed for testing in Dec. 2005 & fully deployed on March 29th, 2006 (with tuning).
• Many webmasters are reporting a loss of indexed pages with the BigDaddy update.
• Matt attributes loss in pages to "low trust" for inbound/outbound links:
  • Excessive reciprocal linking
  • Linking to spammy neighborhoods
  • Link buying/selling
• After the BigDaddy update, 2nd phase was refreshing supplemental index (started in early April 2006).
• Problems with "site:" queries (re: supplemental results not showing up; nothing for hyphenated domains) will soon be fixed.

For Discussion

• Are you using a linkfarm? Have you seen a drop in indexed pages? Would you consider ceasing your participation to see if your indexed page count improves?
• How do you actively build inbound links to your site? Do you try to build links only on relevant sites?
• Aside from the fact that your site might not be doing as well, do you feel that Google's BigDaddy crawler is fairly penalizing sites that are building "low trust" links?

Source:
Matt Cutts: Gadgets, Google, and SEO » Indexing timeline

 

How on earth can Google possibly determine with any degree of accuracy what links are relavent and what ones are not on a given site? I think they are looking for something else, and I think I know what it is.

 

Nice self-promotion post, jward. I can see why you have that red reputation icon next to your name

First, the Cutts blog entry has already been referenced and discussed at length here at DP.

Second, much of what Cutts says about the problems are at best incomplete explanations and at worst just plain wrong.

Third, buying your vbSEO product is not going to help anyone - no, not a single person - to recover from what is going on with Google at present. It has little or nothing to do with an SEO problem and it won't be fixed by an SEO solution, even assuming your particular (very pricey) product is a good SEO solution.

Hint: Go peddle your product in Services and stop spamming the google threads.

 

No he wasn't. He was pointing to an advertisement for his product.

He could have posted the same points here if his intention was to critique or summarize the Cutts blog, as others have done in the two or three other threads discussing that blog entry. Instead, he tried to take people off this site to his where he could flog his product. That's disrespectful and discourteous, and a walking talking definition of blatant self-promotion.

 

Got to agree with Minstrel here. We are already discussing that topic in detail, http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=85615and linking to a page where a product is being hocked is bad form.

I did consider red repping, but pulled back from the brink, and decided to make an open post and leave it at that

 

Post edited due to user consensus:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=931978#post931978

 

Well done Jward, It is nice to see someone who is willing to take action to correct stuff in the open.

 

Yup and his blog was linked and discussed (because I know I added that link to the Big Daddy Timeline in post #132 on page 7 of this thread....)

But on that same note, I wouldn't touch vbseo with a ten foot pole. Its encrypted.

 

Oops! Unfortunately, it's very easy to miss information buried in these lengthy threads.

 

I am having a PHP related website, and i saw ads from DP COOP on my website for "mortages" websites! Matt said in his blogs, that google is penalizating for this kind of links!

 

this is the sort of 'wrong end of the stick' comments that start rumours.

READ the WHOLE post, not just the bit where Matt says. 'there are links to a mortgage company and that is bad'. The styatement needs to be read in context. Mortgage links are not bad at all. What Matt was saying is that 'off topic linking is bad'. NOTHING to do with mortgage links being bad.

Fpr the record, I think it is accepted that Matt was talking through his backside when he stated that mortgage links were not relevent, as the site was a real estate site. I would be concerend if there were NOT links to a mortgage site from ther