<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>beu blog &#187; Spam</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/tags/spam/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.beussery.com/blog</link>
	<description>{atlanta, seo, google, gadgets, technology &#38; geekery}</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:25:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com"/><atom:link rel="hub" href="http://superfeedr.com/hubbub"/>		<item>
		<title>Did the Russians take Bing?</title>
		<link>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2010/06/russia-take-bing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2010/06/russia-take-bing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 06:24:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Ussery</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[russia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beussery.com/blog/?p=627</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Worksheetsengine.com is a two month old domain name owned by an individual in Russia. It has roughly 500,000 pages indexed by Google and a homepage PageRank of 2 despite being entirely duplicate content. According to Compete the site gets 125k unique visitors per month but, I have a feeling these visitors all think they&#8217;re using [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Worksheetsengine.com is a two month old domain name owned by an individual in <a href="http://whois.domaintools.com/worksheetsengine.com">Russia</a>.</strong>  It has roughly 500,000 pages indexed by Google and a homepage PageRank of 2 despite being entirely duplicate content.  According to <a href="http://siteanalytics.compete.com/worksheetsengine.com/">Compete</a> the site gets 125k unique visitors per month but, I have a feeling these visitors all think they&#8217;re using <a href="http://www.bing.com">Bing.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2010/06/russia-take-bing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google No Longer Suggests Directory Submission</title>
		<link>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/10/google-no-longer-suggests-directory-submission/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/10/google-no-longer-suggests-directory-submission/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:25:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Ussery</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Directories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PageRank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine optimization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Directory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Webmaster Guidelines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beussery.com/blog/?p=172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While Google has condemned buying and selling links that pass PageRank, they&#8217;ve encouraged listing in paid directories like Yahoo for years. It seems that era may have come to an end earlier today. The following bullet points have been removed from Google&#8217;s Webmaster Guidelines Webmaster Help Center* &#8220;Have other relevant sites link to yours.&#8221; &#8220;Submit [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While Google has condemned buying and selling links that pass PageRank, they&#8217;ve encouraged listing in paid directories like <a href="http://209.85.165.104/search?sourceid=navclient-ff&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fdir.yahoo.com%2FComputers_and_Internet%2FNews_and_Media%2FComputers_and_Technology_Blogs%2F">Yahoo</a> for years.  It seems that era may have come to an end earlier today.  The following bullet points have been removed from <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&amp;answer=35769">Google&#8217;s Webmaster Guidelines Webmaster Help Center</a>*</p>
<ul>
<li><strong><em>&#8220;Have other relevant sites link to yours.&#8221;</em></strong></li>
<li><strong><em>&#8220;Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.&#8221;</em></strong></li>
</ul>
<p>Does this recent move reflect a renewed emphasis on rooting out paid links passing PageRank and/or low quality links by Google?</p>
<p><em>*As mentioned, the bullet points above have been removed from the US version of Google&#8217;s Webmaster Help Center.  Other <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en-uk&amp;answer=35769">versions</a> may not yet reflect this change.</em><br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;</p>
<p><strong>UPDATE:</strong> Hat tip to <a href="http://www.cartoonbarry.com/">Barry Schwartz</a> who noticed <a href="http://www.jlh-design.com/">John Honeck&#8217;s</a> post in <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help-chit-chat/browse_thread/thread/f943766fde76e87e">Google Groups</a> where Google&#8217;s <a href="http://johnmu.com">John Mueller</a> comments on the change.  Barry provides a full recap at <a href="http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/018387.html">SERoundTable.com</a> and <a href="http://searchengineland.com/google-removes-directory-links-from-webmaster-guidelines-14921.php">SearchEngineLand.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/10/google-no-longer-suggests-directory-submission/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TinyURL SEO</title>
		<link>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/tinyurl-seo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/tinyurl-seo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 02:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Ussery</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Googlebot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PageRank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[analytics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine optimization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TinyURL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TinyURL analytics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TinyURL PageRank]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beussery.com/blog/?p=59</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A friend of mine recently emailed to ask, how TinyURL impacts SEO? It&#8217;s a good question and one many folks can&#8217;t answer so, I thought I&#8217;d blog my answer to his question! For anyone not familiar with TinyURL, in layman terms it&#8217;s a tool where users can enter long displaying URLs to get a shortened [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ianbenson">friend</a> of mine recently emailed to ask, how <a href="http://tinyurl.com/6a3a94">TinyURL</a> impacts SEO?  It&#8217;s a good question and one many folks can&#8217;t answer so, I thought I&#8217;d blog my answer to his question!</p>
<p>For anyone not familiar with <a href="http://tinyurl.com/">TinyURL</a>, in layman terms it&#8217;s a tool where users can enter long displaying URLs to get a shortened version.  TinyURLs are often used where long URLs might wrap and therefore break, such as in email or social media web applications like <a href="http://twitter.com/beussery/statuses/853093896">Twitter</a>.  In more technical terms, TinyURLs are short, dynamically created URLs that redirect users to another intended URL via 301 redirect.  Because TinyURLs &#8220;301&#8243; or permanently redirect, search engines <strong>should not</strong> index the TinyURL but instead <strong>should index and pass PageRank</strong> to the actual URL.</p>
<p><strong>It is important to note, TinyURLs to paid links passing PageRank is a violation of Google Webmaster Guidelines and that sites like <a href="http://twitter.com">Twitter</a> use nofollow techniques to prevent spam.</strong></p>
<p>On their own, TinyURLs can be search engine friendly from a technical perspective.  At the same time, I wouldn&#8217;t suggest replacing your site&#8217;s navigation with TinyURLs and would point out that tracking TinyURLs via analytics might be difficult.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/tinyurl-seo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Whois Domaintools Paid Links Passing PageRank</title>
		<link>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/04/google-whois-domaintools-paid-links-passing-pagerank/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/04/google-whois-domaintools-paid-links-passing-pagerank/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 01:14:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Ussery</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine optimization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[whois]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/04/google-whois-domaintools-paid-links-passing-pagerank/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few weeks ago Google launched a new feature intended to provide users with whois data in Google&#8217;s main SERPs. By entering a query like &#8220;whois google.com&#8221; users are returned new whois data including creation and expiration dates in Google&#8217;s main results. In addition to the new feature, Google provides users the option for more [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few weeks ago <a href="http://www.google.com">Google</a> launched a <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/nice-news-quote-feature/">new feature</a> intended to provide users with <a href="http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2008-04-18-n27.html">whois</a> data in Google&#8217;s main SERPs.  By entering a query like &#8220;whois google.com&#8221; users are returned <a href="http://searchengineland.com/080418-182623.php">new whois data</a> including creation and expiration dates in Google&#8217;s main results.  In addition to the new feature, Google provides users the option for more information via &#8220;Whois record for google.com&#8221; link which resolves to domaintools.com.  After linking directly from Google&#8217;s main search results to domaintools.com, users are greeted with various details about the domain including website title, description and even an &#8220;SEO Score&#8221; provided by domaintoools.com.</p>
<p>After linking from Google&#8217;s main SERP to domaintools.com you might notice, there are lots of ads provided by Google.  If you look closely, right along side those Google ads you&#8217;ll find paid links passing PageRank at domaintools.com.  Paid links passing PageRank are a <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&amp;answer=66736">violation of Google&#8217;s Webmaster Guidelines</a> and grounds for being banned from Google.  In this case Google is linking to pages with paid links passing PageRank!</p>
<p>Here is an example using the cached text version of the domaintools.com landing page linked to by Google for the query &#8220;whois google.com&#8221; <a href="http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:http://whois.domaintools.com/google.com&amp;hl=en&amp;strip=1">http://209.85.165.104/search?&#8230;</a>.  In it you&#8217;ll notice <a rel="nofollow" href="http://vpslink.com/?utm_source=domaintools&amp;utm_medium=banner&amp;utm_campaign=dtsmall1">http://vpslink.com&#8230;</a> is a paid link passing PageRank.  As I mentioned at <a href="http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=22270">SearchEngineWatch.com</a> the paid link domain ranks #1 for the keyword term used in it&#8217;s ALT anchor text at <a href="http://www.domaintools.com/">domaintools.com</a> and linked to by the <a href="http://whois.domaintools.com/google.com">Google Whois</a> feature.</p>
<p>If you would like more information about paid ads at domaintools.com and have $10k per month, click on the &#8220;<a href="http://www.domaintools.com/sponsor/">Sponsor us</a>&#8221; link to the right of the Google search box.  I&#8217;ve not seen many banner ad landing pages with a PR of 6!</p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.beussery.com/blog/">beu</a></p>
<p><strong>UPDATE:</strong> &#8211; In response to this post being picked up by <a href="http://www.blogoscoped.com">blogoscoped.com</a>, <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com">Matt Cutts</a> (Head of Google Web Spam Team) <a href="http://blogoscoped.com/forum/129858.html#id129917">confirmed</a> earlier today that <a href="http://www.domaintool.com/">DomainTools.com</a> is now in compliance with Google&#8217;s Webmaster Guidelines.  DomainTools is now blocking ads with paid links passing PageRank via robots.txt.  <strong>Sincere and special thanks to Matt, Google and DomainTools.com for swiftly resolving this issue!</strong></p>
<p>- beu</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/04/google-whois-domaintools-paid-links-passing-pagerank/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Google Spam Recognition Guide for Quality Rater Reviewed</title>
		<link>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/03/new-google-spam-recognition-guide-for-quality-rater-reviewed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/03/new-google-spam-recognition-guide-for-quality-rater-reviewed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Ussery</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Googlebot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guidelines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[QS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/03/new-google-spam-recognition-guide-for-quality-rater-reviewed/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new and updated version of Google&#8217;s &#8220;Spam Recognition Guide for Quality Raters&#8221; that surfaced recently. At first I was a little skeptical as to the document&#8217;s authenticity. After a little &#8220;forensic&#8221; analysis, I feel reasonably certain the the document is at least partially legitimate. I&#8217;m still going through the document but, a few sections [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new and updated version of Google&#8217;s &#8220;Spam Recognition Guide for Quality Raters&#8221; that surfaced recently.  At first I was a little skeptical as to the document&#8217;s authenticity.  After a little &#8220;forensic&#8221; analysis, I feel reasonably certain the the document is at least partially legitimate.  I&#8217;m still going through the document but, a few sections seemed worth mentioning.  Big hat tip to <a onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/vizualbod.com?referer=http://www.beussery.com/blog/wp-admin/edit.php');" href="http://vizualbod.com">vizualbod.com</a>.</p>
<p><em> &#8220;Revised Rating:<br />
Vital<br />
Useful<br />
Relevant<br />
Not Relevant<br />
Off-topic<br />
Didn&#8217;t Load<br />
Foreign Language<br />
Unratable&#8221;</em></p>
<p><strong>Interesting confirmation that being &#8220;relevant&#8221; isn&#8217;t always the most important issue.</strong></p>
<p><em>&#8220;Some individuals have more than one blog and/or more than one homepage on a social networking site (e.g. myspace, facebook, friendster, mixi). When these pages are maintained by the individual (or an authorized representative of the individual), they are all considered to be Vital.&#8221;</em></p>
<p><strong>Hmmm&#8230; think social networks are a total waste of time do you?</strong></p>
<p><em>&#8220;Relevant<br />
&#8220;A rating of Relevant is assigned to pages that have fewer valuable attributes than were listed for Useful pages. Relevant pages might be less comprehensive, come from a less authoritative source, or cover only one important aspect of the query.&#8221;</em></p>
<p><strong>I&#8217;ve always suspected this notion of a total number of &#8220;valuable attributes&#8221; as being important.  As in, more information is better.  This factor also comes into play when sites use formats or technology which prevent Google from extracting information used as signals.</strong></p>
<p><em> &#8220;Recognizing true merchants:<br />
Features that will help you determine if a website is a true merchant include: </em></p>
<ul>
<li><em>a &#8220;view your shopping cart&#8221; link that stays on the same site and updates when you add items to it, </em></li>
<li><em>a return policy with a physical address, </em></li>
<li><em>a shipping charge calculator, </em></li>
<li><em>a &#8220;wish list&#8221; link, or a link to postpone purchase of an item until later, </em></li>
<li><em>a way to track FedEx orders, </em></li>
<li><em>a user forum, the ability to register or login, </em></li>
<li><em>a gift registry, or </em></li>
<li><em>an invitation to become an affiliate of that site&#8221;</em></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Confirmation that even &#8220;quality sites&#8221; could be mistaken as other or in some way depreciated if all bases aren&#8217;t covered.</strong></p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.beussery.com/blog/">beu</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beussery.com/blog/index.php/2008/03/new-google-spam-recognition-guide-for-quality-rater-reviewed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->