Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 37
- Sphinn It!
Went Hot: November 7, 2007 - 12:59 pm
Posted By: AndyBeard 303 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.volodymyrzablotskyy.com)
Category: Google SEO
He is looking on this as being experimental, to study the differences, and has even come up with some predictions that he might receive less links because of it due to being looked on as a "bad neighbourhood" and even a potential benefit of less spam.
9 Comments
Comments
Very curious to see the results of this.
I think the key will be to convert what traffic he does receive into subscribers. I certainly won't stop linking to him.
The robots.txt disallow will mean that Google still lists the site, but most of the entries will be showing as URL-only.
Their system will attempt to construct a title for each page, firstly using the ODP description (if there is one) and maybe by using the old titles that it already knew about before the disallow was added.
Some, maybe many, of the site URLs will be dropped, but a large number will show as URL-only for a very long time.
g1smd,
Is that true even if I have requested the removal via webmater tools?
I don't know if it is the same now.
In the past, using the Google URL Removal Tool would completely remove the URLs from the SERPs for 180 days. There was no way to get them added back in if you made a mistake.
I haven't removed any URLs using any Google tool since the time that the Removal Tool moved into the WMT area. Nowadays I far more prefer to use 301 redirects and custom 404 pages.
Just one word:
Bravo! *claps hands*
I wish more people would follow Vlad's example. He is actually walking the walk, not just talking the talk.
"I imagine bloggers may hesitate to link to me since there will be no sign of my website in Google- this will result in a smaller number of links in the future to my blog. Will this turn my blog into a “bad neighborhood”?"
- Bloggers will not hesitate to link to you Vlad. Links predates Google.
- Your blog doesn't join a bad neighorhood unless you link into one. So no worries there.
BTW, $2000 for paid reviews/TLA is chump change compared to what you can generate as an affiliate. Paid reviews especially takes time and is not worth the trouble unless you're paid ~$200/hour (not $200 per review).
What g1smd says is true. Matt recently confirmed this again in GG.
If anyone is still following this thread ust wanted to post an update. The bottom line, my experiment is not worth repeating. Whether we like it or not Google will do what the hell they want. One thing that webmasters have learnd is how to adopt.