Super website seo pages

I removed your affiliate part of the link, dane. I'm sure you don't mind, right?

 

Yeah right! And exactly how will they police that than? How will they write the bill?

And yours is rude.

As he was citing one...

So targetting typo's is spam? Small text is spam? Page swapping is spam? Mirror domains only hurts your site. When was the last time you actually saw a link farm?Keywords unrelated to site is spamming too huh? So does that mean that every thread on the DP forums that isn't related to Webmaster resources is spam then?

I feel somewhat the same in regard to your post.

What is the point you are actually trying to make?

You also haven't responded to my previous questions...

 

Those "methods" i cited sebasics are either downright spam methods or if abused. And yes, i'm being rude on this one.

>>danephillips - "Fact these weirdos who think they are the internet police."

You think that's polite sebasic?

>> sebasics - "You also haven't responded to my previous questions..."
yes, that was days ago when it was still fresh. and i even am right now. I'm always open for debate on any topic as long as you don't use a "superiorly vulgar tone" and been in the debate since the very first posts or so and not jump from nowhere and indirectly tag me a "weirdo"

>>danephillips - "Now on Cloaking: Cloaking is not illegal in fact if you knew anything about the internet, you would already know google and yahoo both using cloaking (and still do) So if they use it and then say we cannot who the hypocrite?"

...forget the rude tone but explain this to me please. btw, google and yahoo are not "mothers property" if i can say. If they say you can't use it then you can't use it. Even if they do use it internally or eternally, it's their service just like i can paint my office's wall blue and say to my staff "No one wears blue clothes or you're fired!"

>> sebasics - "You also haven't responded to my previous questions..."
huh? you ended up with "Or are we going to jump on the ethics train again..." and you think i'll ever gonna respond to that?

p.s. sebasics, i'm fully aware we have very different point of views however, I'm absolutely not here to get into bad terms with you or make a few enemies on DP. Let's just show we're open-minded ok?

 

That's fine - We (as mentioned previously) have very different view points on what is and isn't acceptable...

However, that guy wasn't being rude to you perse - ok weirdo's is not a kind phrase to be used even generally, but I really didn't get the impression that it was aimed toward you.

This was my question...

>>Anyway - are you telling me that if you had the knowlegde to build spammy sites that make you lots of money, very quickly that you wouldn't?<<​

(I'm not gonna neg rep you back, although if I did, I'd leave my name)...

 

I alreadu have the knowledge and i already make enough by not spamming.

Sebasics, if you had the knowledge to make a full-time living and make $$ very very quickly by using ethical methods, wouldn't you?

I don't really use this stuff but rarely and only on people i know and appreciate only, always green though. But you if you disagree with what i say, you can if you want and leave your name too please. I don't think my "reputation" on a forum will be shown by the # of green squares i have

 

My name isn't plural
Frankly, I just don't think it's possible in the same way as it is to spam SearchEngines...
That's the whole point with "Ethical" sites - they take time to build...

Added: If it wasn't you that repped me I apologise...

 

Imagine it from a users perspective. They log on to Google to do some research. They type in "How to fix a broken sink", then the first 50 pages that load are duplicate crap sites from your spammy Mass Duplicator.

They visit the first site in the SERPS, get some useful info. Then they click the next site in the SERPS and find it's the exact same page as the first site, only the words are changed. No new info for their research, just more of the same. Then they check the third site, fourth site, fifth site...all filled with duplicate crap but worded differently.

If you honestly believe that doing this is not spam, then you are basically a spammer who is in denial.

 

This sounds like something that is being used already to fill Yahoo's results with crappy scraper sites. For this offer I have to say "No SpankYOU!" -Ace Ventura

 

I never said it wasn't spam... I just don't have an issue with producing it...

 

webmistress,

don't you thinks sort of ironic that you have such a problem with "spammers" but are a big proponent of affilate datadeeds

Affilate datafeeds are spam, they are duplicate content, that clutter that search results, whose only purpose is for you to make a buck

Affilate datafeeds, if you havn't noticed are rountinuely kicked out of the indexes unless you monkey with them, to beat the duplicate content filters.

They add no value to the web, everything that is in the datafeed is already availible on the parent website, or on a website of someone who really sells the product.

All you datafeeds site do is redirct traffic with your affialte id attached, so maybe before you call other people spammers, maybe you should take down all your datafeed sites .....

 

ferret, in late 2006 I will have, according to my estimates, 200,000,000 datafeed pages indexed by the search engines making me an excess of (unrevealable $$). I had to smile when sebasics said that spamming makes quick cash that no other method can make. It's not and only temporary as you may know.

I thought i made it clear in your mind in another thread, that you cannot possibly compare a datafeed site with a spammy one. A datafeed site only contains descriptive pages with products info, price, name and so on while a spam site only contains crappy information with only intention to confuse (or enfuriate) the visitor and cause an adsense click. For example, if you search for "baby wears", and find one of my datafeeds, you're getting the exact products you're looking for - baby wears and baby related products. Whether it's products from my own site and service or a feed from another one, it's useful and ethical.

>>ferret77
Affilate datafeeds are spam, they are duplicate content, that clutter that search results, whose only purpose is for you to make a buck

>>ferret77
Affilate datafeeds, if you havn't noticed are rountinuely kicked out of the indexes unless you monkey with them, to beat the duplicate content filters.

They ARE duplicate content with google's new algo hence penalized but definitely not spam or else amazon and other big sharks would not have provided them. I have made up methods that make my pages "unique". In most of my older datafeeds site you will find that every page incorporates a "product review". Visitors can comment on this page and hence, make it stand out with unique content and unique writings.

Many of those sites i'm talking about are more than 4 years old so they haven't been penalized as such due to their seniority in google's index.

>>ferret77
They add no value to the web, everything that is in the datafeed is already availible on the parent website, or on a website of someone who really sells the product.

I suppose, you're talking about affiliate programs with this statement It's the way any "affiliate" promotion works. The search engines is just a free promotional method for me and so many others but i also invest in offline and online paid campaigns which makes the whole difference. I can't possibly see you promoting your crappy sites on a brochure

(...i guess i'm losing my time)

 

Oh yeah, in case i didn't made it clear and still look like a "spammer" for some - I'm a very strong believer in original web content. Most of my sites that are not datafeeds are high-quality sites that contains articles and pure content written by me or my staff.

 

(Again, name isn't plural)

Is that why you didn't reply then?

Where do you get off saying that aff data feeds aren't spam and that other methods are... It *is* spam...

If you sat down and wrote 1 page of content for each of the products you sell - that is "White Hat". If you are ripping content from feed, and adding "Other things" to the page to "Avoid a penalty" what would you class you actions as?

I'd say you were spamming.

(I wrote this before your last post, but still think if you are using feeds to generate content that you are being hypocritical).

 

LOL, "Gibberish"... what's that all about?

 

Sebasics, you think i have never contacted google about this issue? lol

 

I don't care if you've contacted them or not - It's still spam.

It's affiliate crap - how else would you class it?

How different are your datafeeds from my stuff?

I don't cloak my pages - you make more in my experience if you don't...

So I guess the only differentiating(sp?!?) factor is off-page...

And we both know that off-page isn't going to effect the longevity of the site.

 

I think the main problem is the word SPAM.
SPAM use to refer only to unsolicited email, now the term is being misused to describe any 'dodgy' method employed to get better rankings in Google's SERPs.

If I choose to publish a website with any/all the 'spam' methods listed, that's entirely up to me. It's none of your business and it's certainly none of Google's business. Google can't tell me what to do, it's MY website. My hosting company can set some rules - like, no porn, but Google? give me a break.

If I want to produced 10,000 pages all with similar content worded differently - that's my business. If Google doesn't like it, that's their problem not mine. There's no way that would ever be illegal (unless there were copyright infrigments, but that's a different matter).

If a searcher uses Google to find info and only finds the 'same' page repeated 10 times, then that's Google's problem, not mine. If Google can work out what's going on and do something to fix their faulty algo, fair play to them - but as fast as they do, new methods will spring up to replace the ones that no longer work. That's the game!

Common sense tell you to avoid anything too blatent, unless it's a throw-away-domain or you really don't care about Google (shock horror). But it's up to the individual webmasters to decide what is appropriate and what isn't. It's certainly not up to Google. All they can do is offer some friendly advice so that if you are concerned about being dropped by Google you know what to do and what not to do. But if you're suggesting there will one day be a law that says I cannot publish a page with the word 'viaggra' repeated 1000 times, I'd say you're giving Google way too much credit. Having said that - it would be pretty dumb to implement something that had this effect on Google SERPs because the complaints would start coming in and they would be forced to do something about it. Hint - fly under the radar...

I completely agree with the comments regarding datafeeds - even tho I utilize them heavily on all my affiliate sites. Thing is, the only people who care about this is Google, I don't care if my sites aren't 100% orginal content as long as they make me lots of money while I sleep, my customers don't care that they are just seeing my version of commonly available data, they just care that they found what they were looking for.

The one thing I've noticed when people start using the S word with regards Google, is this holier-than-thou attitude that just stinks of sour-grapes.

SEBasic had a valid question which was given a very weak answer. If you knew how to set up 1000's of pages very quickly that would bring in lots of money very quickly, wouldn't you do it? Of course you would. Saying that you don't need to 'spam' to do this is rubbish and you know it. Good luck doing everything the way Google would prefer you to do it, but if you are really serious about your SEO work, you are necessarily required to push the limits as far as possible - because everyone else is - if you don't your site will never see the light of day for competitive search phrases. That's just a simple fact - you may not like it, you may think you're above that sort of thing, but just because you feel you are 'right' because you aren't using any dirty-tricks doesn't make it so, it just means you are playing it safe - which necessarily means you are losing out to those that aren't being quite so cautious.

The skillful part is knowing where to draw that line....
Too far one way could easily get your site banned from Google.
Too far the other way and you won't stand a chance at being competitive - but labelling your more successful competitors as 'spammers' won't help you pay your bills.

I would be all over a tool that rewords paragraphs while maintaining their meaning. I'd feel much better knowing that my datafeed driven pages aren't an exact copy of all the other affiliate sites out there. Articlebot caught my attention, but to be really useful a tool like this would need to run on my server and run in real-time on fresh data. Pipedream? Maybe - who knows what the future holds, one thing's for certain, Google has it's work cut out! But is that a bad thing? I don't think so.

 

webmistress

Its funny how you justify what you do, you make it sound like if it makes money, then that makes it ok,

point blank, datafeeds add nothing to the internet, do you think it makes the search results better when , people see 100 pages of aws stuff, when they search for book

You are making the user experience worse by flooding the results pages, with 100,000 pages of duplicate content.

If google is so cool with datafeeds, why do they kick them out regularly.

If you say your data feeds actually make the internet better, and they aren't spam, then you are delusional.

I thinks it rather hypocritcal for someone who sits around generating 100,000s of pages of duplicate content, covered with their affialte link to call people "spammers", and try to take some sort of superior stance against people.

People who are just other webmasters just like you, trying to earn a living online.

PS: you will need 200,000,000 million, I have at least a couple million and it hasn't made that much so far

 

Thank you!

Spammers are scumbags! But people who try to game SE's are not doing anything morally wrong- IMO. So what, they're breaking some "rules"- they're not breaking the LAW!!

Yes, they're putting themselves at risk but that's their prerogative.

Some may say that they're taking business (money) away from other sites. But that's BS! SE listings are free and no business should rely so heavily on something which it cannot control. Marketing is not supposed to be free!

 

The so-called webmasters you're calling here are officially known as "spammers". Google said they had no problems with datafeeds when i contacted them so i have no problems making them. If you say otherwise then, perhaps you're a chief enginner at google and probably we'll all hear an official announcement on google blog that datafeeds is spam soon. Btw, i program my own stuffs and don't use any third-party scripts so it's original and unique.

Your others points are absurd and i've already explained my points. Please give me a clear explanation on how you think spammy pages are usefull and not just call everybody hypocrites please! I will refer to what google told me and if one day they say that datafeeds are spam, i will stop making them and amazon.com and other giants can get prepare to go out of business.