"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dge1fm$2n38$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> __/ [Euro Stacey] on Friday 16 September 2005 09:43 \__
>
>> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:dgdq6p$2l69$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> By serendipity, I have just discovered that someone registered
>>> schestowizt
>>> [sic.] dot com 3 days ago. Should I feel flattered or is this intended
>>> to
>>> become a source for frauds, which should make me worried?
>>
>> Roy, I would get worried as of yet. Many people buy closly related
>> domains
>> to others for the hope of gaining mistyped traffic.It looks to be one of
>> those spamming sites. They do try and gain all traffic possible. I would
>> just keep watch over them.
>
>
> Why do you reckon I should keep on eye on them? I hope there will be no
> plagiarism...
Keep an eye on them if you feel that would make you feel better. Only if you
feel uneasy about them.
>
>> I constantly get spammers stealing my title and snippets for their
>> purposes.
>>
>> <HUGE_URL>
I know I had to use the cache as it the info was removed.
>> The above has been removed along with those like it. I emailed them and
>> asked firmly to have the info removed. I just have to wait until Google
>> removes it.
>
>
> I hope I don't have to go that far. For a small selection of pages, it
> usually isn't worth the time. For the same reason, Google barely ever
> respond to messages. Every concerned Webmaster or dissatisfied surfer
> tries
> to get answers from a human, to no avail.
I emailed the owners of the pages and of course reported the pages to Google
as spam. Normally those spam reports are not replied back to. Whenever I
have emailed Google for answers or even Group abuse I have heard back from
them in a reasonable time.
>
>> I don't mind scraper sites that get snippets to fill up pages as long as
>> they provide the actual link.
>> http://www.behrooznaj.com/make-rag-rugs.html . I have a couple olf those
>> in my backlinks so I would assume that they are good links. Plus, the
>> domain and file name usually are related making the link even better.
> I know what you mean. Nonetheless, such pages are unhealthy for the Web
> and
> they can steal some of your SERP's.
>
They haven't stole any of my SERPs yet as they would need more links and PR.
I don't see them in the SERPs as far as Google...I have to porposely look
for them.:-) I am talking about the top 100. They have made my SERP look
better as far as how many pages are out there. Before there were only about
87,000 pages using the exact phrase rag rugs, now that has doubled.
I do however see them in Yahoo, it takes Yahoo a lot more time to clear out
spam than Google. MSN is OK, but still shows more spam than Google.:-)
>
>
> __/ [Euro Stacey] added on Friday 16 September 2005 09:47 \__
>
>> Typo "wouldn't".:-) Need my coffee fix....haven't had my total fill yet!
>
>
> Yes, I quickly noticed it. The context made up for that confusion.
I thought so, but made sure!
> Thanks Stacey!
No problem!
|
|
