Skattabrain, sounds like you're using the Coop for client sites, if so the hat is off, you've a huge pair....
why is that? my customers know what they are getting in to ... it's not like they are being decieved. i'm one of those guilty of telling them more than they want to know. but these recent days, it's mostly for my own projects.
That makes a certain amount of sense to me... and would account for why some people perceive penalties while many others don't... Works for me...
I am still reading this thread and love this idea. What about length of the experiment? It seems to me I have heard people mention coop gives a great spike in rankings, but then tapers off over a longer period of time. I am not sure how long is long. one year? But for this experiment to hold it should be an on-going test, no?
Yesterday went n/a on all three se's then this today: Google: 22 Yahoo: 30 MSN: n/a tis early days yet so would expect it to bounce around a bit more. What the hell is msn doing? Would have expected them to pick it up sooner.
good stuff, but the win situation is when we see the G #'s, although i'm impressed there is no negative hit yet on G. i think we all know how easily msn/yahoo are manipulated by coop.
yeah, you're right. i guess i'm waiting to see page 1 #'s ... but that's probably unrealistic anyways given the content. i guess i'm about to eat my hat. if this sticks, maybe it's new sites, not new linking practices causing some of us to see less then great results?
You didn't really think Google would somehow allow people lower other sites rankings do you? If such a "power" was granted to someone by Google, if used properly it would be much more valuable than being able to raise your own rankings. If I was a shady guy, I would take the ability to lower site rankings vs. raise my own any day. heh
this is true shawn. so do you think there is a threshold when google simply says "hey these links are junk ... so no value is given to you on account of them"? maybe this article from tdman is on to something as well? http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=12846
To be honest, I have no idea... there are so many interdependent variables with Google's algorithms that you can't really define any one thing, because what will work for some sites, won't work at all for others. Personally, I think it's (mostly) a waste of time to start making such broad generalized definitions about what Google likes and doesn't like, because it's not going to apply to everyone. And even if you got it exactly right, it's going to be different tomorrow.
But they know the algo, they saw the patent application. I know it for sure cause I read it on the internet!
Don't over-react. I want to see how this pans out! The fun is just beginning. Let's see how this site ranks in December 2005. If it is still in the top 20, then COOP is a proven winner in my book.
Hows that site doing in yahoo? Can I email them and tell them to put "charity , charity, give to charity, charity is good, get your charity here , charity , charity" on their front page?
No cheating, ferret77 - this is a test of the Coop, not how Y! values on-page factors higher than G does