Is reporting a site to Google over 20 times then seeing it removed spamimg spam? I can’t help but think if Google took it seriously it wouldn’t take 20 times (of my time). Rather than just blowing big names out once in a while, why dosen’t Google spam report listen. I have now found my second competitor now using YAAAAWWWNNNN and if it takes 20 times again Google can keep it.

Shouting out BMW once in a while is all fud…sorting out spam report =:)

Good job, dude! That’s impressive.

Now..here’s what’s going to happen (the two scenarios):

1) The site won’t be removed. Webmasters will be pissed off and harass Matt and Google for hours on end because of the technique and the way an authority site is allowed to get away with it.

2) The site will be removed. Webmasters will be pissed off and harass Matt and Google for hours on end because of the removal of what appears to be an authority site.

This, right here, is why I wouldn’t want to be in Matt’s shoes for all the gold in the Rockies. That is a bitch of a call to have to make.

Although I have to say I agree with you on this one, Bob. I’ve seen quite a few sites pulling this off (n forty-nine spelled with a number interactive dawt com) and getting rewarded for it.

It’s also a big problem in the web design community because customers lose link juice to greedy designers. But I digress.

I’d like to see this sort of thing dealt with the way HEDir deals with it (by the way, this isn’t my site but I am a mod on it, so some bias). If we see what I call network link farms, the umpire calls strike three on the inside corner and out they go. But I’m just one man, and I don’t expect anything to happen just because I said something about it. (That’s not a rag, by the way…that’s just the reality of the situation.)

Above is all the linkspam at the bottom of ticketmaster.com, None of these links should pass PR

I have a friend (no really a friend) not myself who lives off his site and he is suffering greatly from the recent winds of change / and just plain reduced Google Presence (and its not spam-my)

its informational and unique content .. yeah its there to make a buck but so are all the other sites in his category (online shopping coupon type stuff) but with content that is unique

But what is apparent from the PR/backlink update is that something is going on. I don’t know what, we don’t know what, and we probably never fully will know what. But something is up.

As far as the SERPs go, I’ve seen a pretty significant change in some SERPs and none in others. I’ve also seen others repor the same.

And yeah, I’d agree with you that there may be some datacenter mixing and matching and shaking and stirring going on.

Your comment earlier of:-

>>>This might be the “post-cursor” (is that a word?) to the backlink/PR update.

Is intresting – as I still dont believe that the PR update of a week or so ago (which was pretty much Mozilla Googlebot generated from my obversations) has really effected the serps yet.

Perhaps we are still in a cross over period from the normal Googlebot crawl/index and ranking and the Mozilla Googlebot crawl/index and ranking and all will become clear shortly.

But…and I don’t intend for this to be anything other than advice…

The last portion of the one post implies that the solution to your specific problem (what’s your site, by the way?) was the one that you posted, rather than what could be other things.

If you make a statement like that, people are not always going to accept it as fact. There are those (me, for example, character flaw as it is) who will try to determine if it is fact for our own knowledge bases, and on rare occasions to play devil’s advocate (the latter was not my intention here).

Anyway, I’m just saying that, before you make a statement like that, make sure all your ducks are in a row, that’s all.

But you deserve credit for at least making your viewpoint public, and you didn’t back down from it. That takes some guts, and that should be respected. So straight up on that. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but I’ll give you respect Ali G-style.

To the person who sent me an unsolicited email: you’ll find my answer in here.

Some of my posts were made when I was a bit wound up as a general fix for the issues I have been talking about have not been applied.

I said in my second post could be coincidence and used the word possibly!

I personally think that the most likely reason (OK probably best not to use only as I did before) is that an engineer picked it up – however, I have not ruled out the other possibilities.

And great if it is one of the other ones as perhaps a fix is near and it will be applied to more sites as time goes on – but my *hunch* says manual intervention.

And also *if* we have got to the stage where Google are identifying sites and manually correcting then surely a call with sites with that problem would be fair, and like the supplemental issue it would hopefully identify a common theme that Google may be able to fix in the algo.