Comments on: More about Google and poker

By: Ghatesme

Ghatesme — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:40:26 +0000

Just wanted to say thanks ex-google. I enjoy reading your insight on this as it’s useful.

By: Ex-Google

Ex-Google — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:57:16 +0000

A couple of things to keep in mind. First, as you know, there are obviously too many websites out there to review manually, so Google relies on algorithms to identify spam. The sudden widespread changes you noticed recently are surely due to the rollout of a new algorithm. Manual spamfighting is going on all the time with continuous updates to Google’s blacklists; there are not usually abrupt widespread changes due to it. Second, all these spam-fighting algorithms are far from perfect; they make lots of mistakes. The “inconsistency” you are noticing is likely just due to the algorithm catching some sites and not catching others for whatever reason. It’s not some human being acting in a capricious fashion (most likely). While this sort of inconsistency leads to very unequal and unfair outcomes, it’s hard for me to see what the alternative is for Google. The problem has to be attacked algorithmically, and no one knows how to create a 100% accurate algorithm.

Another point I would make is that the manual spamfighting efforts tend to be rather conservative. If a site has any shred of redeeming value, and is not doing something blatantly in violation of Google’s rules, it will probably not get banned. The algorithms, on the other hand, employ a broader brush…

By: LinkXL

LinkXL — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:46:51 +0000

You need to buy links where there is no footprint, and the links are contextual like LinkXL.com. Also SEO’s and buyer’s should also do research to see if the publishers are shady or “violating” guidelines beyond “gray” before deciding to purchase a link.

By: Ghatesme

Ghatesme — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:33:43 +0000

Google is flawed in this industry….that’s why SEO is a must. If SEO didnt exist then it would be a first come first serve basis due to the weighting given to aged domains, and keywordindomains.

How would google be able to decide who has the best poker bonus code review. Im surely not going to link to a competitor from my site and give them traffic and potential money. People don’t freely link to each other. Bloggers do because they don’t lose anything from doing so.

You may know the basics of SEO, Nat, but it doesn’t seem you understand the true “game” being played here. Not every site is geared towards creating massive amounts of great content or written for poker strategy. The link buying is for MONEY keyterms not content keywords. Buying links and putting the effort in to rank those pages should reward the SEO’er as they’re probably getting the best deals for the players from the poker rooms because of all the money they spend to rank up high.

By: sirfwalgman

sirfwalgman — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:02:52 +0000

Who the fuck are you to decide that Poker blogs should be black listed because they suck and talk about bad beats? A lot of these sites keep low limit players on sites in droves and build up communities of loyal players. Like you started to say in your article nobody should decide on the quality of the content except the person searching. I agree with you there is a lot of advertising abuse but if people like reading shitty bad beat sites they should be able to. A search on a general term like “Poker” should bring up every shit site in the world and you should need to sift through it. Good sites like PokerNews and others you mentioned should be able to generate their own buzz and get people through various means not just a general search on “poker”.

In general I do not give a fuck if advertising dries up because I write my blog for fun and so I can whine about bad beats and get all the poison out of my system after a tough night. If people want to pay me that is just a bonus.

I also think Google is fucking moronic to blacklist sites like mine which have advertising but are mostly about the content. Fucking Google. I really used to like them too.