I mean i actually have garbage page link directories that we run ranking above our own authority sites. then i just caught some bastard who had like almost 200 doorway pages. he was using a dorway pagesd all spammed to high hell, that linked to these other doorway/i dunno what the hell to call them pages
they were all:
and withing the no frames tags spammed to all hell. it was ridiculous. i reported his a#s to msn, with a huge list of all the directories he used..the whole 9. i mean this guy was getting #1 for everything, the real killer is he didn't offer have the services!

yahoo is going to spank microsoft.
Back to top

That's interesting. Were those financial type search terms?

I'd like to take a closer look at the page code the guy is using, can you sticky me a url?

I'm seeing something like this more and more with Google too, people are creating links that are sent through a page that creates a 301, which somehow makes google think that their site is the authority source site, and the originating site is the duplicate site.

I have to admit, currently I am getting less and less impressed with all the search engines. Google is having more and more trouble with technical components of its search, the sandbox to me is a continuing red flag that strongly suggests that their algorhythm may be in more serious problems than they are admitting.

Yahoo is showing similar signs of weakness, for a site I do, out of about 2200 pages, it was returning about 160 indexed for a few months, then that number dropped to about 16. Which means Yahoo has only indexed a tiny fraction, less than one percent, of all the site pages. Why nobody talks more about this issue is beyond me. That's technically even worse than Google's sandbox.

Yahoo, on the other hand, is not sandboxing sites, but seems to be following a strategy of simply dumping site pages to make room for new sites, which will also be incompletely indexed. Sort of like just pouring water out of a full cup then adding some more. Google, on the other hand, seems to be using a more sophisticated strategy, which is to let the water evaporate, then to let in the amount of new sites and pages that the now absent water allows.

I'm reading that MSN beta also is not completely indexing new sites. A quick test confirms this. Add to that Google's dramatic slowdown in spidering large amounts of new pages and you get a picture of the two old search engines maybe having trouble updating their core technologies, and the new MSN beta still really being a beta, despite rumours that it may actually go live this weekend.

All in all, that's a good thing, these companies need a big kick in the pants, they are all really not doing a very good job, times like this is when some young upstart company that nobody is paying attention to can make a move.

Problem with that is it simply takes too much raw hardware to run a real search engine. I guess Gigablast is kind of a one man show, but it couldn't handle real traffic, and has currently only indexed about 1 billion pages, which is very good, but is only a fraction of the current pages out there, most of which of course are pure autogenerated spam.
Back to top

the way i see it is that yahoo basically combines all of your ranks and sends it to your homepage. i find all of the site rankings i get in yahoo, or at least 75% goto the homepage of 2000+ page site.. when i do a site command it only has 9 pages indexed. i will say though yahoo is the best converting traffic from any of the SE's hands down.

yes, btw, they were financial terms. i'll send you the guys info. he's not using a 301. google has lots of problems. especially with 301s. you can hijack an entire site's listings. it's a serious problem. I would never stoop to that level. plus i would be curious to see if a company could sue you for lost earnings if you hijacked it's search listings. regardless, that's just too much bad karma for my tastes.

msn is feeding it beta results to the main msn.com site search intermitently. gigablast is overrated IMO. it's quick but the results are spam filled, and many of the cached pages are old.
Back to top