Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    1743 points caspii | 11 comments | | HN request time: 0.228s | source | bottom
    1. qeternity ◴[] No.27427892[source]
    I have little to no experience in SEO. Does Google have a history of weighing in on situations like this and manually penalizing bad actors? If so, I would love a link to read about.
    replies(6): >>27427934 #>>27427956 #>>27428177 #>>27428215 #>>27428819 #>>27430715 #
    2. jboynyc ◴[] No.27427934[source]
    Here you go: https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/
    replies(1): >>27428588 #
    3. silviot ◴[] No.27427956[source]
    They state that they don't manually pick results, but improve their algorythms to solve these problems. They prefer to share the least amount of details though, since it would better inform SEO spammers.
    replies(1): >>27431700 #
    4. cocoafleck ◴[] No.27428177[source]
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-... I'm sure that the title tells you that the article has an opinion (not unbiased), but I think it is a useful source.
    5. RileyJames ◴[] No.27428215[source]
    I agree with some of the other comments, googles actions on SEO are always shrouded in a little "algorithmic" mystery. That said, they do apply "manual action" penalties to individual websites.

    Using google search console you can determine if a manual action has been applied to your own website: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175?hl=en

    Rather than determine the ranks, these actions remove / punish offending websites from the ranks, effectively making room for 'good' actors.

    Manual actions often come after a a significant change in ranking algorithm or policy, and can be reverted / resolved in some cases. This usually requires removing or disavowing (in the case of unauthorized or unresponsive sites) the links pointing to a website.

    6. bliteben ◴[] No.27428588[source]
    https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/join-the-us-digital-service/

    wow that's amazing, I guess I sort of quit reading blogs like this when all the RSS readers died.

    replies(1): >>27430229 #
    7. vgeek ◴[] No.27428819[source]
    You may want to dig into http://www.seobook.com/blog for an opinionated (albeit typically objectively correct) perspective on many things related to the SEO industry. There are a few studies about Thumbtack (with GV investment), RapGenius and eBay penalties and their subsequent recoveries.
    8. bombcar ◴[] No.27430229{3}[source]
    People seem to have stopped producing blogs like this ever since Facebook are the world.

    I wonder how much of modern search crappiness is because much of the good content that used to be in small blogs is now locked away behind facebook’s logins.

    9. aww_dang ◴[] No.27430715[source]
    https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175?hl=en

    >Google issues a manual action against a site when a human reviewer at Google has determined that pages on the site are not compliant with Google's webmaster quality guidelines. Most manual actions address attempts to manipulate our search index. Most issues reported here will result in pages or sites being ranked lower or omitted from search results without any visual indication to the user.

    10. AtNightWeCode ◴[] No.27431700[source]
    Not true, you can get penalized and you may be noticed about it in the google search console.
    replies(1): >>27432729 #
    11. silviot ◴[] No.27432729{3}[source]
    Thanks for the correction. I remembered it wrong. In this article for instance Matt Cutts details how they go about flagging individual pages [1]

    [1] https://searchengineland.com/googles-cutts-we-dont-ban-sites...