Page 2 of 2 First 12
  • Jump to page:
    #16
  1. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    272
    Rep Power
    17
    You buy those domains and tell me how you go!!!

    Somehow, Google is doing a very imperfect job in this index of resolving multiple domains that point to a single domain. There are issues surrounding how those domains inherit rank and position, and also which URL should be used in the index.

    Google has failed to normalize its database structure properly.
    I always find it odd when people post with authority what is simply wild speculation.

    AFAIK. Google considers http://www.XYZ.com to have the content found at the URL http://www.XYZ.com/IAMANIDIOTFORREDIRECTING/defalt.asp, if the domain redirects, via a 302 redirect, yet keeps the second domain in teh index, along with its associated content. Is this good or bad? IMHO good. Helps out lots of bad web programmers.

    Does this speak of Google's inability to {INSERT NEW DB WORD I LEARNT IN CLASS TODAY HERE}? No, absolutely not. It just says they made a compromise for teh greater good.

    What's more, to assume anything based upon toolbar PR is ridiculous. Google themselves say it is only a curiosity, and not to be taken as Gospel.

    99.9% of what people see with toolbar PageRank fluctuation is latter found to eb untrue, and to use it as the basis of specualtion dressed as proof of anything is very, very odd.

    IMHO, you would be better served if, next time, rather than claiming, in both title and initial post, to have knowledge of something, when in reality you don't, stick to a less definitive title. Try something like: "Is Google giving higher PR by mistake?", and then post your speculation. I reckon you will get closer to an answer if you aska question than posts suppossed facts.
  2. #17
  3. Sick of BL's, PR + Google
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    865
    Rep Power
    40
    Check the date on the first post, this is well out of date, why was it dug up?
    Last edited by thewormman; Apr 21st, 2004 at 08:39 AM.
  4. #18
  5. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego USA
    Posts
    1,274
    Rep Power
    17
    Sounds fishy to me, but if someone wants to try it, digitalpoint.org is available... (digitalpoint.com is PR7)

    Of course, if I decide I didn't like what someone was doing with it, we are the registered trademark owner of "digital point", so... {shrug}

    - Shawn
  6. #19
  7. Contributing User
    SEO Chat High Scholar (3500 - 3999 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    3,874
    Rep Power
    24
    howstuffworks.org is PR0 and is for sale. this thread needs to go away.
  8. #20
  9. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Highland Park, IL
    Posts
    47
    Rep Power
    17
    Originally Posted by projectphp
    You buy those domains and tell me how you go!!!


    I always find it odd when people post with authority what is simply wild speculation.

    AFAIK. Google considers http://www.XYZ.com to have the content found at the URL http://www.XYZ.com/IAMANIDIOTFORREDIRECTING/defalt.asp, if the domain redirects, via a 302 redirect, yet keeps the second domain in teh index, along with its associated content. Is this good or bad? IMHO good. Helps out lots of bad web programmers.

    Does this speak of Google's inability to {INSERT NEW DB WORD I LEARNT IN CLASS TODAY HERE}? No, absolutely not. It just says they made a compromise for teh greater good.

    What's more, to assume anything based upon toolbar PR is ridiculous. Google themselves say it is only a curiosity, and not to be taken as Gospel.

    99.9% of what people see with toolbar PageRank fluctuation is latter found to eb untrue, and to use it as the basis of specualtion dressed as proof of anything is very, very odd.

    IMHO, you would be better served if, next time, rather than claiming, in both title and initial post, to have knowledge of something, when in reality you don't, stick to a less definitive title. Try something like: "Is Google giving higher PR by mistake?", and then post your speculation. I reckon you will get closer to an answer if you aska question than posts suppossed facts.
  10. #21
  11. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Highland Park, IL
    Posts
    47
    Rep Power
    17

    This refers to something that was going on almost a year ago.


    Originally Posted by projectphp
    You buy those domains and tell me how you go!!!


    I always find it odd when people post with authority what is simply wild speculation.

    AFAIK. Google considers http://www.XYZ.com to have the content found at the URL http://www.XYZ.com/IAMANIDIOTFORREDIRECTING/defalt.asp, if the domain redirects, via a 302 redirect, yet keeps the second domain in teh index, along with its associated content. Is this good or bad? IMHO good. Helps out lots of bad web programmers.

    Does this speak of Google's inability to {INSERT NEW DB WORD I LEARNT IN CLASS TODAY HERE}? No, absolutely not. It just says they made a compromise for teh greater good.

    What's more, to assume anything based upon toolbar PR is ridiculous. Google themselves say it is only a curiosity, and not to be taken as Gospel.

    99.9% of what people see with toolbar PageRank fluctuation is latter found to eb untrue, and to use it as the basis of specualtion dressed as proof of anything is very, very odd.

    IMHO, you would be better served if, next time, rather than claiming, in both title and initial post, to have knowledge of something, when in reality you don't, stick to a less definitive title. Try something like: "Is Google giving higher PR by mistake?", and then post your speculation. I reckon you will get closer to an answer if you aska question than posts suppossed facts.

    This refers to something that was going on in the Google database almost a year ago. Google fixed the problem about last April or May, many Internet years ago, so of course you don't see it anymore. It's 2004 now.

    Why are you trolling around in the ancient history of this forum? This is pretty dry stuff. If you want to find George Bush's military records, or that picture of Jane Fonda sitting on John Kerry's lap, this surely isn't the place.
Page 2 of 2 First 12
  • Jump to page:

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo