Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.

I admit, I got a wee bit cranky and mouthed off. But, despite the crankiness, the points are valid, I think.
Comments23 Comments  

Comments

Avatar
from swags2804 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

To coin an old phrase: "It’s Google’s ball and they’ll play where they want".

Avatar
from eKstreme 2501 Days ago #
Votes: -1

It’s Google’s ball and it’s our job to deflate it. We give them the content they run their services with. They can show some respect. Pierre

Avatar
from Skitzzo 2501 Days ago #
Votes: -1

@swags, if I ran a company that sold something and I locked my employees in cramped, poorly ventilated, and dirty rooms I’d probably face all sorts of charges. This is about Google abusing their workers so to speak. It is our content that makes Google money and yet they continue to screw us over. Even worse, Google has positioned itself as the gateway to the internet. At what point does it stop being "Google’s ball"?

Avatar
from swags2804 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 2

eKstreme and Skitzzo, don’t for a minute think I’m defending Google or their petty actions. Perhaps because it’s a British saying it hasn’t translated so well. Over here we use the phrase towards anybody acting in a spoilt or bullish manner who use their muscle to bully and get there own way, which is just how I see Google acting. Sorry for any confusion.

Avatar
from DazzlinDonna 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 1

That certainly doesn’t translate well on this side of the pond.  Glad you cleared that up. 

Avatar
from Wingnut 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

That image is my new background.  Thanks :)

Avatar
from TimDineen 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 1

"it’s our job to deflate it"  ??This is exactly why Google is fighting you on this link-buying/selling and PageRank issue. 

Avatar
from dedmond29 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I thought the post was great (and valid) - wish I had seen it sooner in the "what’s new" section!

Avatar
from TimDineen 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

From the post: "It’s not the actual PR that anyone is really worried about. It’s the loss of control. It’s the random punishment."What about this tbPageRank "penalty" was random? It’s a clear sign directed at people/sites that are violating a specific long-standing guideline.

Avatar
from corey 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 1

show me where google defines this specific long-standing guideline

Avatar
from Skitzzo 2501 Days ago #
Votes: -1

@ Tim, long standing guideline? Are you kidding me? Google created the nofollow tag to combat blog spam. Then the changed their minds and wanted it used on links that were paid for. They created spam reports and then changed their minds and made it for paid links as well. Hell they haven’t even given a good definition yet of what constitutes a "paid" link! Give me a break.

Avatar
from TimDineen 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 2

So, you are saying that it wasn’t obvious to you that gaming their algo by buying links was a violation? If it wasn’t in their printed guidelines, it should have been obvious as common sense.  Of course Google will eventually take measures to protect it’s service...I know this hasn’t been in their published guidelines for long but: "Buying links in order to improve a site’s ranking is in violation of Google’s webmaster guidelines and can negatively impact a site’s ranking in search results." http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66736And it has been talked about for much longer - whether published in official guidelines or not.

Avatar
from corey 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

"So, you are saying that it wasn’t obvious to you that gaming their algo by buying links was a violation?" so you’re saying that seroundtable’s pr was reduced recently because that website is "gaming the algo" ?

Avatar
from bwelford 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 1

The bottom line on all this is that Google wants to show a distorted view of the world.  I am making the assumption that the change in the TBPR will have some effect on the rankings of "relevant" webpages.  If this is not true, then presumably all this is being done as a game to send a message.  If they are bluffing, this would seem to be a very unwise strategy.The online world is as it is.  If Google wishes to show relevant results for keyword searches done on the online world, then it cannot arbitrarily remove items it thinks should not be there. 

Avatar
from g1smd 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 2

***  Google wants to show a distorted view of the world  ***  Hmm, yes. But their world has already been distorted by people trying to game their system. It must be a very difficult job to try to cancel out those effects before displaying the SERPs.

Avatar
from DazzlinDonna 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

*** It must be a very difficult job to try to cancel out those effects before displaying the SERPs. ***I would think Googles’ bazillions of dollars and legion of brainacs could figure something out to make that job a little easier.

Avatar
from g1smd 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Cancelling out the PageRank effects of run-of-site, and  paid links is a good place to start.

Avatar
from DazzlinDonna 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I think we all agree with that.  Google should certainly discount whatever it wants to discount.  But don’t punish people for not putting some ridiculous tag on a link.  You don’t want to count the link...don’t.  But don’t force anyone to do anything special with that link...and then mess with them if they don’t.  See the difference?

Avatar
from Halfdeck 2501 Days ago #
Votes: 1

"Hmm, yes. But their world has already been distorted by people trying to game their system."Exactly.Google, however, took a wrong turn here. Shrinking the green bar will not stop people from selling links. Google is sending out a weak message. What needs to happen is for link sellers to not only lose green but also traffic and revenue. This TBPR nonsense is just a slap on the wrist."It’s about control."I think SEOs have two choices: 1) play the victim victimized and controlled by the Big-G 2) take matters into their own hands.I, for one, would not advice anyone to spend money on SEOs who operate under the illusion that they are under Google’s control. If Google controls you, then you cannot get the job done.

Avatar
from WillSEOForFood 2500 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I think it’s funny the SEO’s backing Google’s decision and can’t differentiate what Donna is saying, in both here and in her blog.Please everyone  reread this post:"I think we all agree with that. Google should certainly discount whatever it wants to discount. But don’t punish people for not putting some ridiculous tag on a link. You don’t want to count the link...don’t. But don’t force anyone to do anything special with that link...and then mess with them if they don’t. See the difference?"I personally STILL feel this, even if just in the timing of it, goes back to the time of the year. MASS breakdown of rankings and penalizations, right before Christmas... Funny how Google does this EVERY year around this time. Now bloggers dont need adwords, far from it, but I dropped on my PR, but I picked up natural links (though my sites still rank) but there some that are noticing drops in SERPS and PR. Ecommerce sites that rely on Christmas time to get them into the black than have to rely on Adwords to get the customers they need. Googles quarterly profits skyrocket, but it looks semi normal due to the time of the year. When you can change your algo to control how much business you create thats, well thats business and its a beautiful thing. The problem is Google is providing something that just about everyone uses and there comes a point with corporate responsibility. However, at $600+ a share it is actual ILLEGAL for them NOT to do EVERYTHING they can to make their investors as much money as possible. However, I am now putting Google in just about the same category as the oil companies which is right where they should be.

Avatar
from Halfdeck 2500 Days ago #
Votes: 0

"Googles quarterly profits skyrocket, but it looks semi normal due to the time of the year. When you can change your algo to control how much business you create thats, well thats business and its a beautiful thing."*I think it’s funny the SEO’s* drawing conclusions based on nothing but speculation.

Avatar
from WillSEOForFood 2500 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Well, having ten years of doing "this", my "speculation" tends to be more based on saved factual data compiled over the years of running some of the top sites in their respective industries. Million dollar PPC campaigns on some... So speculation to you is fact to me. Funny $600+ dollars a share tends to back my speculation, over your fact ;) Quarterly profit reports do as well :D

Avatar
from Kalena 2499 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Nice rant Donna and I totally agree: http://www.sitepronews.com/archives/2007/oct/29.html

Upcoming Conferences

Search Marketing ExpoSearch Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.



Join us at an upcoming SMX event: