I don’t care whether my reports are ever investigated, but I want the power to tell Google “never ever ever show me this domain/page again.”

In the past few years I read a lot about your work to enhance Google-Listings and give users a better surfing experience. So – good work until now

I write you in that place because, as I – as a programmer – am getting a lot of headache from Google results. Many times – and I mean MANY times … the site of experts-exchange.com is turning up in the SERPs and it seems that they have just the solution, I am looking for.

A few years ago – they were hiding text and always asked for that subscription, where they actually make money with. To me this was very clear cloaking – as I never saw that results, that I saw in the SERPs.

Then … some month ago – they really did post their solutions. They were at the end of their pages – but … when I scrolled down – I could find the correct text, that I was looking for. So that was OK – as I had to skip that massive amount of self-promotion

But today they are cloaking again … and funny enough – they even tell you that a page is cloaked 8-))))) They do this by their own footer-line, which looks like “20071212-EE-VQP-20 – Google – Hierarchy / EE_QW_2_20070628″ for the Google-Bot and like: “20080716-EE-VQP-32 – Hierarchy / EE_QW_2_20070628″ for humans.

To prove this cloaking I did some PDF-Printing, but unfortunately Firefox and IE are not printing the whole html-document well … so I did a MHT-File from IE (save as archive). Also I did a PNG-Screen-Copy to show the JS-Boxes that were closed in the print. Look at that URL. It is a link to my public Media-Center, that I get from my email-provider. The link is open for 30 days.

http://www.gmx.de/mc/V7oeZoVKcOqpt7OxG6mLib7dgfOKcQ
Sorry for german GUI, but that was the easiest way to publish that documents. Click on “GMX Media-Center starten”. You can view the documents in the browser – or download under “Datei – Download”.

I personally think that it is time to ban these guys. They did fool me many many times with their cloaking in the past – and I dont know how many million other programmers …

Have a nice day.

I refer to my last coment of 7 July which appears on this thread and to my proposal regarding spam and competition.

In this connection I’d like to say that I wrote to the Google-department and reported a misconduct sendig it from the Webmaster tool on 7 October.
If you look at my report, you’ll see that the urls specified ( more than 30 mostly repeating the same link text on each site ) are linking to a main target site. Before I informed Google I got in touch with the responsable webmaster as I thougt that the owner wouldn’t know the incident but It seems that they know it quite well – Nothing changed so far.

Perhaps my report is still underway but I am not sure whether I should have sent it directly to Google.es. I preferred to use the main-tool like I prefer to use the main webmaster help because it has much more threads and problem solutions.
Furthermore my former reconsideration request was processed using the english version.

What I’d definitely like to avoid is a situation involving a mixture of information in different languages or the same information arriving in different departments.

Is there anything we can do to prevent more misconducts and protect affected competitors, something similar as I describe on my proposal of 7 July?

Bye
Juan
P.S. I’d like to thank you for finding the time to deal with my previous concern and for your comprehension.

Basically what I’ve been seeing is webmasters using ‘frame’ and ‘noframe’ to show one version of content to bots and another to humans.

Basically what I’ve been seeing is webmasters using and to show one version of content to bots and another to humans. Generally speaking they will have a short, catchy piece of content for human users and a very long copy with keywords repeated throughout.

My assumption was that the competing sites were very weak, but they appeared to be okay and in one case the competition was very fierce.

I have reported a couple of instances but I can still see one of them in the SERPs for that result – it is particularly blatant and I’m really suprised it’s still there. I’d be happy to provide a sample of what I’m talking about via email.