Google Changes Algo!!

[lots0]

In an effort to combat search engine spam and bad search results Google has changed it's famous(infamous) algorithm.

Google is now using cookies and personal recent search history to 'adjust' or "customize" it's search results.

You can read what google has to say about this MAJOR change in it's algo here.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You can also see the change on the google search results page after you have done at least two searches that are similar.

Note the text, on the right hand side of the google search results page about the modified results... "Customized based on recent search activity." This statement is there to inform everyone that your results have been modified based on your recent search activity.

If you follow the link provided by google there is even an option to view the results without the "customization".

If you have noticed a marked change in your traffic from google in the last couple of weeks... This is why.

FYI - in order for this new change at google to really become effective many folks believe that google is now using traffic from google search as a major factor in ranking websites in its search results...

This is going to have a major effect on the traffic a huge amount of websites receive.

This is also going to drive a lot of phony SEO's out business... LOL

 

[GaryTheScubaGuy]

Yea they started doing this around July of 2008. Its all part of the 'custom' search element.

It hasn't affected SEO or really even the traffic because the cookie is typically only live for 30 minutes.

If you are logged into any Google account though the results get skewed. I have site owners constantly questioning results because being logged in can show you higher, if you have clicked them in the past (you'll see how many times you visited this site next to the listing in grey) they rank higher and if you click the little green wiki arrow that has just showed up in the last 2 months it will take it out of the top 10.

Additionally, Google has said that it looks at re-queries when they bounce off a site - which they attribute to insufficient content if done repeatedly. So keeping the visitor on your site, even an affiliate site, is a plus.

The problem is keeping them when the intentions are to get them to the providers website to spend.

 

[AussieDave]

The problem is keeping them when the intentions are to get them to the providers website to spend.

Yes but if your opening new windows from each aff link & each aff link is set-up in a way as to not allow google to crawl it, then it shouldn't have an affect.

Cheers
T

 

[GaryTheScubaGuy]

Yes but if your opening new windows from each aff link & each aff link is set-up in a way as to not allow google to crawl it, then it shouldn't have an affect.

Cheers
T

But how do you do that? Even with a robots.txt, a nofollow or a noindex, Google still crawls every link.

Although they open into a new window, and the original is still open, if they close the window without navigating through its a bounce.

Time on the site may also have an affect though so it would be worth keeping and eye on.

Cheers,

Gary

 

[lots0]

Yea they started doing this around July of 2008. Its all part of the 'custom' search element...

Nope your wrong.
This is a NEW element, that went active the day before I started this thread... This is for ALL users, you don't have to be logged on to google to see the filtering taking place.

Also if everyone's search results are 'changed' or filtered by this... then it does effect SEO... How could it not?

FYI - According to Google the vast majority of search queries take less than 90 seconds to complete including the 'drill down' or 'refining', so any cookie that stays active for longer than about 90 seconds will be effective. A thirty minute cookie is more than long enough to effect search results.

BTW - did anyone notice the algo change tonight?
Seems that some sites that were using 'spam' links to drop their competitors 2nd offset listing in google (displayed under the first result and offset) and raise their own ranking got penalized...lol

You folks be careful where you get SEO advice from...

 

[AussieDave]

NB - If you think google adheres to your site's meta data bot instructions; robots.txt or the nofollow derivative (ironically devised by Google) think again.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

And here from the horse mouth 'Matt Cutts'.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

---------

But how do you do that? Even with a robots.txt, a nofollow or a noindex, Google still crawls every link.

I think it needs to be said & highlighted to newbies that SE bots do not view pages as a human do. They simple crawl the code not the actual compiled web page.

In basis terms if a bot identifies a link it will crawl it. But if in does not identify a link as a link then it wont crawl it. Just using a basic javascript encryption is not going to work. It doesn't camouflage the URL.

However with the aid of php and maybe javascript one could totally camouflage links and make them un-crawlable. The other idea is to flash all your aff links. Bots can't crawl flash content; least not that I'm aware of.

Overkill maybe but if your primary concern is to prevent it Google bots crawling links, then in my book it's worth it.

You folks be careful where you get SEO advice from...

Very good and sound advice

I think this is especially true in respect to our industry.
Although some SEO traits are common practice in any project, you'll find that main stream SEO information doesn't always align itself to our niche markets.


Cheers
T

 

[GaryTheScubaGuy]

Nope your wrong.
This is a NEW element, that went active the day before I started this thread... This is for ALL users, you don't have to be logged on to google to see the filtering taking place.

You folks be careful where you get SEO advice from...

Apparently you are taking my comments as something other than they were intended based on your response...but I am very rarely wrong if I post something, and I'm the first to admit it if I am, so here'e the post from the Google's team;

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Notice the date in the URL and in the post...

They state,

"Recent searches. We take into account whether a particular query followed on the heels of another query. Because recent search activity provides such valuable context for understanding the meaning behind your searches, we use it to customize your results whenever possible, regardless of whether you're signed in or signed out. In order to customize your results and show you the customization details, we keep the most recent query on your browser for a limited time. After that, the information is removed from your browser and disappears immediately if you close your browser.

...and everything else in the post you reference word-for-word...they just didn't put a date on it.

As far as your algo change, there were over 350 last year so they are always happening, sometimes you can see changes, sometimes you won't. They only name this big ones so they can guage reaction.

Lastly, I'd love to see some proof of what you stated about doing social bookmarking to drop out a competitors offset listings with spam links.

Mainly because this is an obvious attack on my advice to use social bookmarking to do this.

I'd like to see it for 2 reasons; the first is I know it works and have done it for 3 years, as recently as last week...

More importantly, your accusation holds no merit in that how could a site get penalised when by building SBM's to a third party - They aren't building links to their own site, or to their competitor that has the secondary listing. So how would that work?

 

[lots0]

Apparently you are taking my comments as something other than they were intended based on your response...but I am very rarely wrong if I post something, and I'm the first to admit it if I am, so here'e the post from the Google's team;

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Notice the date in the URL and in the post...

They state,...and everything else in the post you reference word-for-word...they just didn't put a date on it.

As far as your algo change, there were over 350 last year so they are always happening, sometimes you can see changes, sometimes you won't. They only name this big ones so they can guage reaction.

Lastly, I'd love to see some proof of what you stated about doing social bookmarking to drop out a competitors offset listings with spam links.

Mainly because this is an obvious attack on my advice to use social bookmarking to do this.

I'd like to see it for 2 reasons; the first is I know it works and have done it for 3 years, as recently as last week...

More importantly, your accusation holds no merit in that how could a site get penalised when by building SBM's to a third party - They aren't building links to their own site, or to their competitor that has the secondary listing. So how would that work?

Good God...

I did not make any attack against you.

I disagreed with you and I made some observations based on the most recent google algo change that occurred within the last 24 hours.

I never said anything about using 'social book marks' I specifically wrote 'spam' links... So I guess your saying that what your doing with social bookmarks is SPAM...

If you want to debate when this major change in the google algo went live, I have no problem with that... However, it sounds to me like you just want to pick a fight... and I'd rather not waste my time.

FYI - Scuba guy, I am not taking on any SEO clients, I stopped taking SEO clients several years ago, I am not your competition here...

 

[Simmo!]

Additionally, Google has said that it looks at re-queries when they bounce off a site - which they attribute to insufficient content if done repeatedly. So keeping the visitor on your site, even an affiliate site, is a plus.

About time too. This has been the most logical approach for a long time and I am amazed they haven't (admitted to having) done this earlier. The old link/vote crap is so out-dated in the commercial sector that this is a very positive move IMO. Everyone has always said "content is King" but this finally pushes in that direction. Finally.

In the case of online casinos, this theoretically also gives a boost to casinos that run Flash games - even more so if they host them on their own servers. Those who promote download casinos may well suffer in SERPS (depending on how much impact this change has) as, in theory, casinos like Tote who licence in games and host them could get a significant advantage advantage. Of course, that doesn't affect the "bounce rate" back to Google SERPS necessarily, just plain "bounce rate", so maybe the impact is minimal. Guess we will see in time.

This is great news. Instead of running around "building" links, webmasters are being encouraged to concentrate on providing quality content. Exactly what the web needs.

 

[lots0]

The problem is that even though google is moving toward what I like to call "The linkless solution", they are still dependent on anchor text in html links to rank sites.

But this is a very positive step toward the linkless solution IMO.

 

[GaryTheScubaGuy]

I disagreed with you and I made some observations based on the most recent google algo change that occurred within the last 24 hours.

No I disagreed with you and gave you the proof that you were wrong.

I never said anything about using 'social book marks' I specifically wrote 'spam' links... So I guess your saying that what your doing with social bookmarks is SPAM...

Let's not be coy - that's exactly what you were referring to

If you want to debate when this major change in the google algo went live, I have no problem with that...

No, not at all. If you read through the thread I even made an effort not to be critical or demeaning.

However, it sounds to me like you just want to pick a fight... and I'd rather not waste my time.

All I wrote was that yes it came out, but sometime ago. It seems you took the offence and became critical - as far as to say,"You folks be careful where you get SEO advice from... "

FYI - Scuba guy, I am not taking on any SEO clients, I stopped taking SEO clients several years ago, I am not your competition here...

Lots0 you should take a step back and look at your posts - especially the underlying tone you take.

I'm not here for clients. I've posted at SEO Chat for years, on CAP, and recenlty on GPWA and here. The latter two people; Bryan and Michael Corfman, I met in Amsterdam and decided to spend time contributing.

That's what I do. I give free advice. Ask anyone in this industry that knows me. The key is that its not rhetoric. I spend a lot of resources questioning theories and my own ideas and I share them...its that simple.

Very few affiliates could even afford my services (unfortunately) but if that were the case I would probably spend time on boards that had a much larger subscription base. I like Bryan, he's an American and former military as I am in both cases, plus I just think he's a cool guy.

So no, there are no conspiracy theories or argument provocations coming from my side, but again I think you should re-read.

Cheers,

Gary

 

[lots0]

Free advice is worth exactly what you pay for it...

Telling newbees it's OK to drop spam links is wrong.

 

[GaryTheScubaGuy]

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/does-social-bookmarking-work-i-thing-so.31043/