Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 1126 Location: London, England
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 6:54 am Post subject:
Hi Scott,
I'm far from being an expert but..
>>When a search engine like AV returns 2018 results, that's pages correct?
1)Am I right?<<
Yes
>>2) Is there anyway to tell how many websites make up the 2018 pages?<<
I don't think so, except perhaps laboriously checking each result for the domain.
Something to think of, an engine may return a million results, but if you check out those way down the list you will see that they are not really optimized for your phrase, they may only mention it once in passing.
>>I'm losing my mind!!!<<
Lost mine years ago mate, nobody's ever returned it, can't think why they would want to keep it, it was no good anyway!
Okay, now to REALLY frustrate you... sometimes pages rank in the top 10 for a keyword and only mention it once, or none!! Go figure. Is there any logic????
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 Posts: 5839 Location: by the beach, Australia
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:54 am Post subject:
One possible reason is cloaking, where the web site owner uses a script that presents visitors with one page and the search engines with a different page. If you're considering using cloaking, read the warnings on the Google site.
Another possible reason is that the page has a large number of links to it with the key phrase as the text in the link. The search engine reads those links and decides that the page must be about that topic, even if the phrase appears on the page only once.
It's a good illustration of the importance of getting people to link to you with your most important key phrase used as the text in the links.
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 1126 Location: London, England
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 6:54 am Post subject:
Hi Allan and Everyone,
OK here's a question on cloaking.
As I understand things the only way that the engines find out that a site is using cloaking methods to gain good ranking, is by someone bowing the whistle on them. That could be a disgruntled searcher that has inappropriate results returned or....
...you! as a competitor of the cloaked site.
Nobody likes a grass, but personally I would have no hesitation in informing the engines.
I'm just wondering what everyone's opinion is on this.
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:02 pm Post subject: Cloaking Ethics
Hello Larry.
Larry Chamberlain wrote:
As I understand things the only way that the engines find out that a site is using cloaking methods to gain good ranking, is by someone bowing the whistle on them. That could be a disgruntled searcher that has inappropriate results returned or....
...you! as a competitor of the cloaked site.
Officially, Google strongly disapproves of "cloaking" by banning offenders, but some experts maintain that the reality is not quite as clear cut. It depends...
At the end of the day, Google's future rests with the searchers being happy - that is getting good, predictable results. (Presumably they are less concerned with the exact order that our sites are ranked. That's our problem!)
As a result, they tend to look at the actual results that are delivered to the user.
Basically, cloaking is used for two reasons...
to deliver an irrelevant page for a given search (usually reported by disappointed searchers)
to protect the source code of a high ranking RELEVANT page (usually reported by competitors)
(There's a thin line between using other people's source code for inspiration and just plain theft - this accounts for the second use.)
To be frank, it's an open secret that many of the top SEOs use cloaking for their clients. They claim it's for the second reason, and the SEs leave them alone in the main.
Larry Chamberlain wrote:
Nobody likes a grass, but personally I would have no hesitation in informing the engines.
I'm just wondering what everyone's opinion is on this.
Personally, I think it depends very much on why the cloaking is being used...
I certainly don't have any time for the "spammy" first category, but how about the second? At the end of the day, how much patience would you have with someone who copied your site?
I think cloaking can be ethical when viewed this way, though I've never seriously considered using it myself.
Cheers,
Charlie.
P.S. Incidentally, if you were thinking of "giving it a try"...
There's only one thing worse than cloaking (in the search engines' eyes)... cloaking badly - i.e. poor implementation. If ever there was a subject best left to the "techies" (and professional ones at that) it's this. Get things wrong, and the SEs will crucify you.
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 1126 Location: London, England
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 3:41 pm Post subject: Re: Cloaking Ethics
Charlie wrote:
.
Basically, cloaking is used for two reasons...
to deliver an irrelevant page for a given search (usually reported by disappointed searchers)
to protect the source code of a high ranking RELEVANT page (usually reported by competitors)
(There's a thin line between using other people's source code for inspiration and just plain theft - this accounts for the second use.)
Hi Charlie,
I must confess I was only thinking of the first reason you give. I must also confess the second reason leaves me a little confused, but then I'm easily confused, and also a novice at this and not at all techie.
Let's say I wanted to nick a page of yours, all I would need to do is copy and paste and I could put up a clone of your page complete with exact same keyword density. Why would I need your source code?
Naturally you would report me to the engines, my hosting providers ect. and I would be up a certain creek without a paddle.
I expect everyone has, like me, found pages returned on an engines list that may be on topic, but where the description doesn't match anything on the page, and can only have been cloaked to gain unfair ranking. As I said in my previous post, I would be interested if most of us agree that is right to report these pages.
Quote:
P.S. Incidentally, if you were thinking of "giving it a try"...
There's only one thing worse than cloaking (in the search engines' eyes)... cloaking badly - i.e. poor implementation. If ever there was a subject best left to the "techies" (and professional ones at that) it's this. Get things wrong, and the SEs will crucify you.
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 7:11 pm Post subject: There's a bit more to SEO than keyword density...
Hello again Larry.
Larry Chamberlain wrote:
Let's say I wanted to nick a page of yours, all I would need to do is copy and paste and I could put up a clone of your page complete with exact same keyword density. Why would I need your source code?
Yes you could ceratinly steal the content (the words on the page), but these days key word density is only a part of the equation when it comes to good rankings...
Google in particular pays a great deal of attention to linking structures (internal and external) as well as what other sites say about you via the anchor text of incoming links. And don't ask me to explain PageRank!
Basically, it is the linking structure, CSS and tables used to create the page (another reason to be wary of automation tools) that the SEOs are so concerned about hiding by cloaking. They basically create a similar page output, but using different source code, so their secrets are safe.
It's only really the poor publisher who cares if you steal his content!
Larry Chamberlain wrote:
I expect everyone has, like me, found pages returned on an engines list that may be on topic, but where the description doesn't match anything on the page, and can only have been cloaked to gain unfair ranking. As I said in my previous post, I would be interested if most of us agree that is right to report these pages.
This isn't necessarily cloaking at work...
Firstly, Google might get your page description from your DMOZ listing or your description meta tag. Secondly, there's the influence of anchor text with incoming links, as previously mentioned.
If you're convinced it's "foul play" and the search result is inappropriate, then it's a fair cop.
Hope this helps clarify,
Charlie.
P.S. To be honest, if you are trying to compete in a market where cloaking is prevalent, good luck! You can't realistically expect a very top ranking because of the big guns you'll be up against.
P.P.S. Hurry up and get better, Allan - my typing fingers are beginning to hurt!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Your host: Allan Gardyne. Earning a good living from affiliate
programs since 1998.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
