Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Stopping Spam at Google...

__/ [ tonnie ] on Thursday 16 March 2006 14:10 \__

> Mel wrote:
>> It would be so easy to stop spammers from manipulating google and I
>> don't understand why they just don't do this:
>> 1. Get rid of the google tollbar which tells spammers the pagerank of a
>> site. Without knowing the pagerank of a blog comment or guestbook
>> spammers would be in the dark as to whether it was spam worthy or not.
>> 2. Get rid of two links they show at every url address listed in google,
>> the links that say Link: and Contain the Terms: are the two links by the
>> url address (when you do a url address search). Without those two links
>> which show all the backlinks of a site in google spammers would have no
>> links to spam at would they? They would also need to disbale the code
>> for finding backlinks for sites in google.
>> It seems pretty simple to me that if spammers couldn't find backlinks of
>> other sites and didn't know the pagerank of them as well then the
>> spamming would be all but over, pretty much anyway. They coudl still get
>> lots of free and real domains and do some creative link farming to
>> create their own link popularity but they would be in the blind
>> completely as to which guestbooks, blog comments, message boards ect
>> were worth posting to.
>> Now if Google really wanted to stop spam that would be all they would
>> have to do to stop it. The algo could still be based on link popularity
>> just as it always was only it would be invisible to viewers where that
>> link popularity was coming from. It's the high and easy visiblity of
>> backlinks and their pagerank that Google merrily shows that are creating
>> the spam problem in google and not their algo or the link popularity
>> idea.
>> There's absoluteley no reason in the world why people would need to see
>> the backlinks and pagerank of sites and it does nothing to enhance
>> search. It only helps spammers to spam better. The truth is out there.
> The truth is that it aint that simple.

@Mel:  What about those who *truly* need to check which sites link  (back)
to  their  site/s? Your argument is similar to suggesting the diminish  of
E-mail as means of putting an end to spam. You only enable the spammers to
win by changing policies and putting away valuable tools.

Mind  you, Yahoo display far more backlinks than Google, so the issue  in-
volves  more  than  a single company and requires  standardisation.  Think
about  this: rel="nofollow" had a bad enough impact and it was the  conse-
quence  of spam. At least one reader of this group is/was a comment  spam-
mer. The impact was very negative and deterred involvement in some on-line
communities.  The  last thing we need it more deprivation,  which  affects
merely /all/ crawlers (it started with Google).

Best wishes,


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index