Supplement Results

I also respect both Aaron Wall and randfish, as anyone reading my posts here or elsewhere would be aware. That doesn't mean I accept everything they say or rely on them as my sole source of information about search engines or anything else, as apparfently you do.

 

I doubt the feeling is mutual as Aaron has called people morons for less than what you have said.

And no I couldn't tell that from your posts as they teach seo and you teach baloney.

 

Well, I have had some communications with Aaron in the not too distant past. Why don't you ask him what his opinion is? That might be more productive that your endless unfounded assumptions...

 

I know what his oppinion is and if you read his blog it would be plain to you too...

 

I'm sorry, visio, but these conversations with you are just way too stupid. I'm out. Carry on as you wish.

 

minstrel & visio. Go get a room.

 

Minstrel,

I feel for you, it has to be tiresome having to deal with the people who crawl out of the woodwork every few weeks and berate you for some minute detail in something you said.

From what I have seen, I think you are actually way ahead of the current SEO thought on this forum. People seem to think what was true 12 months ago HAS to be true today. As if nothing ever changes... I think you are way ahead on supplemental pages. I had some of the exact same thoughts you posted about.

People seem to be attributing all these supplemental results to on page or recip links or coop or whatever. But I think just changing to unique titles, or unique meta's or getting rid of recip links is not the answer. We've all seen a site or two that obliterates these simple fix type of answers to the supplemental page issue.

I know visio is saying that one-way > recip, but it's just like everything else, he sees a small subset of data and makes an assumption. Until he has the msn, yahoo and google algos... he can't know. Or until he has a control experiment that lends some serious credibility, but there's just too many variables to contend with to do that.

If he has site A with tons of recip links and site B with many less one way links... and site B comes out on top, even if this scenario plays out 20 times in a row... it still doesn't mean anything concrete. He can assume it does, but since google claims to examine hundreds of variables (many of which are unknown to us) then it could also be that site A and site B happen to differ in several other consequential ways besides the one variable he has chosen to focus on.

I don't know why he is disagreeing so much about this. He can feel free to make the assume that the recip link variable is the one that makes the difference. I don't know why he feels he has to "convert" people to his side or "prove" it to anyone. It's his belief and he's free to have it. But that doesn't make it right. (And I'm sure you could find several exceptions if you felt like spending the time to ruin someone's day.. lol.)

Anyway.. every time I read one of your posts, I see someone trying to start something over some minute detail... blah, they should know better. =)

 

Actually if we were referring to Yahoo and MSN I would almost agree that recip and one-way are equal but like you said it isn't the same now as it was 12 months ago in google and Google now realizes the value of a one-way over a recip. Anybody can get a good amount of recip links but it is quite hard to get the same amount of one-ways and logicly wouldn't they then have different values? And it isn't on just seeing a small amount of data. Do you call a multi-million dollar company small data? No I am not going to say I worked for one. I have been priviledged to work with some very large companies but haven't had a multi-million dollar one yet. However I have put sites in the top ten for a keyword which was held very firmly by multi-million dollar companies. I have worked on literaly thousands of sites not including mine and I think I can say for myself that it isn't small data.

I don't mind you having your own oppinion and that is great. But I do have a problem with minstrel and the way he acts.

But like I said before. I challenge anyone to a contest where my opponent gets to use recip links and try and outrank a site which onyl has one-ways. I think you would find the outcome quite definate. I have outranked a site which had thousands of backlinks(yahoo) with a newer site which only have 7 one-ways and 5-10 dir links.

Like you said yourself things change and you got to be watching when they do or you will think things that are totaly wrong.

 

Lol....some one should lock this thing... it was hijacked long ago..

Minstrel -- Likes to sing
Visio - is wearing a BLack Hat (and a mask too!)

Let's all play nice!

 

Why Google keeps supplemental trash results?

I have seen many of those crappy MFA sites which are not only listed, but also displaying thousands of supplemental results

 

How supplement result pages can hurt a web site? Its pagerank? or SERPs?

 

If they are categorized as supplemental results than google can deal with them in a lot as useless or atleast much less useful than the rest of the index. Google can perform tests and whatnot and insted of worrying about them ever getting into the index if they are bad they are kept in the supplemental results where they wait. If you are good you sometimes get out.

 

the assumption is that those pages would rank higher in the serps if they were not supplemental.

i just pulled a bunch of pages out of supp hell, simply by changing the meta description and page title... it took google over a month to make the change.

i think that it would have been a lot more complicated if they were supplemental for reasons other than just the page title and meta description.

 

I would say you´re back in hell again (as usually since the BD update).

Forget about PR, this is SERPs.

 

I've been doing some research into Supps for a while. The biggest main reason I've seen pages on my sites go supplemental is due to the description tag being too generic.

One of my forums went fully supplemental, now I've removed the description tag & it's coming back

 

Yeap, it could be a workaround!

 

I think you're all grasping at straws, frankly. I didn't change anything meta tags or anything and my forum has also come back into the top 2 or 3 in Google.

In 90% plus of cases, the problem was not your site to begin with - it was the very flawed Big Daddy and the multiple patches that followed.

 

yup, the pages went right back into supp hell again, lol! good call...

i'm back out again, but who knows for how long? i'm with minstrel, this is a google issue, not a site issue.

i think that removing the meta description is questionable, but what choice do we have? i hacked thru making each description unique, because that's what google displays in the search results, but in the long run it would be easier to just have nothing there.

 

i fully agree with you, danimal.