[Morristown]

I always envisioned a golf cource sand trap myself. Or the pond

[Mouse]

This is my last post so that this dead horse can lie. I promised myself I wouldn't post in this thread either, but there was quite a bit of heated debate about google etc.. so I couldn't help myself. I'm pretty glad that most of the discussion has remained civil.

As you can probably tell, I do not care much for google, and like I said before this is all opinion.

The key is to find new ways to discount links given for reasons other than "admiration" of a site, and Google has yet to find better ways to do that.
Penalizing some sites while others don't get penalized is not right.

I absolutely agree 100%. In fact, I believe that any sort of importance based upon links influencing a web site's search rankings should be done away with. There is no way that an algorithm can identify what is a valued link opposed to a blatant link farm without checking it manually.

I applaud Google for attempting for attempting to ahere to their core value of trying to uphold the spirit of their basic principles, but their logic is inherently flawed. Their idea to provide rankings to sites that provide users with a good experience is impossible.

The user experience is totally subjective and no algorithm will ever simulate how a user interacts with a site on a person to person basis. Sure, some sites are absolutely horrid, and it's blatant to Google when they are doing something"wrong." A web site should be judged on it's design, content, relevancy to that business, service, or idea... period.

A site with a page that links to others within the same business should not be penalized.

[Homesurfer]

Blaming Matt Cutts for actions you don't like from Google is like blaming Tony Snow if you aren't happy with a policy of the Bush Administration.

Matt is the guy that goes to SEO conferences and posts on a blog in an attempt to explain to people what Google policies are, what Google is up to, and what could earn your site a penalty. He isn't the guy that penalizes web sites. He's the guy that talks about it.

Originally Posted by Mouse

I believe that any sort of importance based upon links influencing a web site's search rankings should be done away with.

That's like being in second-year Spanish language class and complaining about the fact that a double-L is pronounced like a "Y" because last year your teacher let you pronounce it as an "L", and you thought it was the "right way".

It isn't.

Realizing that sites of similar topics tended to link to one another is what allowed Google to be the first search engine to consistently deliver consistently relevant results. Every other search engine before Google sucked because they couldn't properly organize search results.

Two guys didn't just dream this up. This is research level stuff done at a prestigious university in the William Gates Building and partially funded by IBM.

But Google made it work.

Because Google was so successful, site owners began to change how they linked and since many weren't on the web pre-Google, many site-owners don't even realize what a "natural" pre-Google link structure is. They think what they are doing is "natural."

Google is trying to educate everyone about the difference between pre-Google "natural" linking and post-Google "unnatural" linkspam. Most site owners don't want to listen. They would rather try to convince the entire spanish-speaking population to pronounce a double-L like an "L".

After a while, the Spanish teacher decides to slap one student's knuckles with a ruler, hoping that the other kids will learn the lesson and pronounce things properly.

[Mouse]

Google is trying to educate everyone about the difference between pre-Google "natural" linking and post-Google "unnatural" linkspam. Most site owners don't want to listen. They would rather try to convince the entire spanish-speaking population to pronounce a double-L like an "L".

Funny their "technologies" cannot do this without manual intervention.

Blaming Matt Cutts for actions you don't like from Google is like blaming Tony Snow if you aren't happy with a policy of the Bush Administration.

Matt is the guy that goes to SEO conferences and posts on a blog in an attempt to explain to people what Google policies are, what Google is up to, and what could earn your site a penalty. He isn't the guy that penalizes web sites.

Matt can go to all the SEO conferences and and post on his blog all he wants. The fact of the matter is that any business that keeps their practices secret, yet dominates the world is suspect. Their practice is BS plain and simple.

Funny.. I didnt blame Matt for a single thing. I blame Google as a whole. Google's policy is to provide a user with the best expirience with a visit to a website based on their rankings. To say that Google is trying to "educate" people is comical.

You meant to say Google is trying to dictate how web design should be practiced.

[Homesurfer]

Originally Posted by Mouse

Funny their "technologies" cannot do this without manual intervention.

It may be funny, but they can't. They've known since at least 1998 that this would eventually become a problem and have not yet come up with anything but a manual situation. So far, that's just the way it is.

Originally Posted by Mouse

The fact of the matter is that any business that keeps their practices secret, yet dominates the world is suspect. Their practice is BS plain and simple.

Lots of companies have trade secrets. Revealing exactly how they do everything would simply provide a better roadmap on how to spam the search engine, and Google's primary goal isn't really to benefit web site owners. Google's primary goal (besides earning a profit) is to provide the best most relevant search result for its users so they get the best information possible, not the site best able to manipulate the search algorithm.

Originally Posted by Mouse

Funny.. I didnt blame Matt for a single thing.

I didn't say you blamed Matt for anything, Mouse. My statement was above the area where I quoted you and not directed toward you at all, but to the general frustration expressed by some of the thread contributers.

Originally Posted by Mouse

To say that Google is trying to "educate" people is comical. You meant to say Google is trying to dictate how web design should be practiced.

Google doesn't tell anyone how to design their site, of course. However, if you want your site included in Google's index of sites, they do provide guidelines on what to do and what not to do so that you don't cross the line into too much "gaming the system." Otherwise, a site stands the risk of being excluded, at least temporarily.

Conclusion:

I understand everyone's frustration, of course, and the need to vent. Every once in a while some of the comments venture off into the realm of "things that just aren't so" and I've tried to limit my comments to those specific areas of the discussion.

I've been working with real estate agents in one way or another since 1988 and fully value the role of the Realtor, just in case anyone is confused. There are those on the web that know me pretty well and understand this to be so. When I disagree, though, I'm not shy about speaking up. Hopefully, I've learned to do that with a little bit of tact.

[MarcinSarasota]

Don't you sleep Terry? 4:08 am?

[Calculator]

Originally Posted by Homesurfer

Blaming Matt Cutts for actions you don't like from Google is like blaming Tony Snow if you aren't happy with a policy of the Bush Administration.

Matt is the guy that goes to SEO conferences and posts on a blog in an attempt to explain to people what Google policies are, what Google is up to, and what could earn your site a penalty. He isn't the guy that penalizes web sites. He's the guy that talks about it.

Terry you are wrong here. Matt is to blame in this case since he is "currently the head of Google's Webspam team" per mattcutts.com.

Matt Cutts is the guy in charge of setting the spam rules and enforcing them. He usually does a good job and tries to be fair but Google is way off base in this case. My guess is his team went off track while he was on vacation. It's now his responsibility to make it right.

[Mouse]

In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act----- George Orwell

[Homesurfer]

Tonight I'm writing my monthly interest rate and housing market reports and I tend to do that kind of work best in the dark of night. Otherwise, I've been trying really really hard to maintain regular hours.

Unlike you guys, I don't have to be available in the daylight hours anymore to take care of clients. I left that behind when I got too involved with the web, and I've spent too much of the last year goofing off. Time to go back to work.

[timlyman]

Advanced Access has been advising agents to engage in practices prohibited by Google for years. When I got one of their sites three years ago one of the first pieces of advice they gave me was to do link exchanges with other agents. This advice was repeated in several of their monthly newsletters. I didn't do it because I knew Google would eventually catch on. If you don't want to get dinged, don't break Google's rules. I just feel sorry for all the people who got screwed because of bad advice from AA.