43 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
43 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Too Much SEO? Google's Working On An "Over-Optimization" Penalty?

by sam770
37 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Look what I found:Too Much SEO? Google
Make sure to hear the audio track there

#“overoptimization” #google’s #penalty #seo #working
  • Profile picture of the author Lightlysalted
    Sometimes people can go overboard on google SEO. My advice is write content and websites for human beings not for search bots
    Signature
    UK Pet Sitting Directory
    Free Delivery Codes
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5850412].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sam770
      They don't talk only about that...
      It looks like google is going to check much closer all sorts of shady backlinks
      Originally Posted by Paid Surveys View Post

      Sometimes people can go overboard on google SEO. My advice is write content and websites for human beings not for search bots
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5850434].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author erob
    I have learned that simple time and effort pays off. I started a simple blog and did one post a day along with ping and social bookmarking and started to see traffic from yahoo, bing and google not a lot of traffic but enough that let me know the search engines know I am there. Slow and steady is best sometimes.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5850455].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Shame there's no video.

    Cant seem to find one either.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5850501].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DavidAmerland
      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

      Shame there's no video.

      Cant seem to find one either.
      You will find the video and an assessment of the proposed Google SEO filter here: Google
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5852161].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Robby54
        I think google allways had an over optimization penality, it started with keyword stuffing and grew from there.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5852420].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    Google's always had an OOP. It looks like they are going to turn it up a couple of notches. This is exactly the kind of thing that's the reason for me teaching to mix up your SEO "recipes" for all these years.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5850860].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bhq
    and how much is too much?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853509].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dellco
      Maybe it's about time. Google starts to take aim at SEO practices. Who would have thought?

      I noticed a site of mine that I hardly built any links to, recover its former position at #2 after being dropped down 7 spots for the past 5 months in the past few days.

      I am also seeing other sites of mine look like they are recovering back lately, after getting hit during Oct and never moving up.

      And one thing in common about these sites is the very slow and actually, almost lack of link building....
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853558].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dmcmark
    It may be affect the SERP of those sites who uses the overoptimization process.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854060].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jwmann2
    Google is odd. How can you over optimizie? Isn't that what they want? Efficiency?
    Signature
    MLB Ballparks|NHL Arenas|NBA Arenas|NFL Stadiums
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854249].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by jwmann2 View Post

      Google is odd. How can you over optimizie? Isn't that what they want? Efficiency?
      I guess you didnt listen to the audio or watched the video. He explicitely explained that they don't like to see keyword stuffing, which is a high keyword density. How would that ever be efficient?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854260].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    A quick point: Google can't do too much to downgrade sites with "unnatural" off page linking...If they do, expect "negative SEO" to be the new catch phrase as degenerate SEOers begin to focus on destroying the competition, instead of building their own SEO.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854364].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      A quick point: Google can't do too much to downgrade sites with "unnatural" off page linking...If they do, expect "negative SEO" to be the new catch phrase as degenerate SEOers begin to focus on destroying the competition, instead of building their own SEO.
      I imagine they would target on-page keyword stuffing, which would be a no-brainer that the webmaster created the stuffed keywords.

      Could also be targeting those blogs with so much comment spam that you have to scroll for a 1/2 hour to reach the bottom of the page.

      If they cracked down hardcore on pages with massive amounts of external backlinks, they would thin the herd quite a bit, IMO. Not necessarily downgrade the sites that the external links are pointing at but the site that is allowing those external links to be created. Bury the link source in the SERPs & downgrade the BL source PR.

      That's the way I would clean house (SERPs).
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854406].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        I imagine they would target on-page keyword stuffing, which would be a no-brainer that the webmaster created the stuffed keywords.

        Could also be targeting those blogs with so much comment spam that you have to scroll for a 1/2 hour to reach the bottom of the page.

        If they cracked down hardcore on pages with massive amounts of external backlinks, they would thin the herd quite a bit, IMO. Not necessarily downgrade the sites that the external links are pointing at but the site that is allowing those external links to be created. Bury the link source in the SERPs & downgrade the BL source PR.

        That's the way I would clean house (SERPs).
        Lol, goodbye Wordpress / Squidoo and tons of forums
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854559].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

          Lol, goodbye Wordpress / Squidoo and tons of forums
          Not really.

          The problem that Google hasn't dealt with is holding individual webmasters accountable for promoting link spam.

          If a webmaster allows everyone & their brother to spam their sites pages, then they are one of the sources of link spam. Hold the site BL source responsible by dropping his PR & burying the page in the SERPs, it will only hurt any existing pages that depend on that page for PR/links. In other words it couldn't be used against competition as a weapon in the SERPs.

          The PR on a page with a lot of external links is already diluted on the OBLs, but Google doesn't hold the backlink page responsible.

          I stopped allowing external links in my blogs comments a long time ago & I'm down to a single site that even allows a comment., the rest of the sites don't allow any type of comment.

          I think I'll apply for Matt C. job & show Google how it's done, lol.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854694].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            Originally Posted by yukon View Post

            Not really.

            The problem that Google hasn't dealt with is holding individual webmasters accountable for promoting link spam.

            If a webmaster allows everyone & their brother to spam their sites pages, then they are one of the sources of link spam. Hold the site BL source responsible by dropping his PR & burying the page in the SERPs, it will only hurt any existing pages that depend on that page for PR/links. In other words it couldn't be used against competition as a weapon in the SERPs.

            The PR on a page with a lot of external links is already diluted on the OBLs, but Google doesn't hold the backlink page responsible.

            I stopped allowing external links in my blogs comments a long time ago & I'm down to a single site that even allows a comment., the rest of the sites don't allow any type of comment.

            I think I'll apply for Matt C. job & show Google how it's done, lol.
            Smart idea indeed though Wordpress already put comments disabled on default and when harvesting fresh new lists I get succesrates like 0.2%, so it's only a matter of time before the autoapprove lists die out I guess. Now forum spam is another thing
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854724].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author markowe
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        I imagine they would target on-page keyword stuffing, which would be a no-brainer that the webmaster created the stuffed keywords.

        Could also be targeting those blogs with so much comment spam that you have to scroll for a 1/2 hour to reach the bottom of the page.

        If they cracked down hardcore on pages with massive amounts of external backlinks, they would thin the herd quite a bit, IMO. Not necessarily downgrade the sites that the external links are pointing at but the site that is allowing those external links to be created. Bury the link source in the SERPs & downgrade the BL source PR.

        That's the way I would clean house (SERPs).
        Yeah, that would be real low-hanging fruit for them. I mentioned in another thread - on-page optimisation is getting ridiculous with all these courses that teach putting the keywords in EVERY HTML tag and every meta tag known to man, plus in bold in the first paragraph and italic in the last, or whatever. What site would do that naturally? Easy footprint to target. Not to derank/deindex, just to give less weight to these factors as on-page indicators.
        Signature

        Who says you can't earn money as an eBay affiliate any more? My stats say otherwise

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854704].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        I imagine they would target on-page keyword stuffing, which would be a no-brainer that the webmaster created the stuffed keywords.

        Could also be targeting those blogs with so much comment spam that you have to scroll for a 1/2 hour to reach the bottom of the page.

        If they cracked down hardcore on pages with massive amounts of external backlinks, they would thin the herd quite a bit, IMO. Not necessarily downgrade the sites that the external links are pointing at but the site that is allowing those external links to be created. Bury the link source in the SERPs & downgrade the BL source PR.

        That's the way I would clean house (SERPs).
        If I were Mr. Google, I'd downgrade platform links, which I think they are already starting to do.

        Platform links are those that are placed on sites using popular platforms and have common footprints like "powered by phpboard" or "powered by wordpress".

        We're pretty much saying the same thing...But on the other hand, Google should only reduce the value of these links, not punish sites that have them. If they punish sites, expect "negative SEO" to become popular.

        And negative SEO would end up being a major public relations nightmare for Google, when sites begin to sabotage each other for higher Google rankings.
        Signature
        Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
        Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854710].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author nik0
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          If I were Mr. Google, I'd downgrade platform links, which I think they are already starting to do.

          Platform links are those that are placed on sites using popular platforms and have common footprints like "powered by phpboard" or "powered by wordpress".

          We're pretty much saying the same thing...But on the other hand, Google should only reduce the value of these links, not punish sites that have them. If they punish sites, expect "negative SEO" to become popular.

          And negative SEO would end up being a major public relations nightmare for Google, when sites begin to sabotage each other for higher Google rankings.
          Google will never really win the war on this without giving us the chance to take out our competitors. Take a look at the blog networks that some people seem to get penalized for (haven't experienced this myself in anyway yet) but if they try to do this on a more massive scale I can just take out my competitors by distributing articles for them.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854732].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

            Google will never really win the war on this without giving us the chance to take out our competitors. Take a look at the blog networks that some people seem to get penalized for (haven't experienced this myself in anyway yet) but if they try to do this on a more massive scale I can just take out my competitors by distributing articles for them.
            What if Google says that platform links are useless? Then they will neither help your sites or hurt others.

            Let's be honest, most platform links aren't really about the quality of the resource they point to, but rather who has pushed the button on XRummer or Scrapbox the most. And if we can find the footprints for these platform sites, so can Google.

            For platforms like Wordpress, Google will need to work on an algo that will detect if the link is "in content" or from a comment. This shouldn't be too hard.
            Signature
            Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
            Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854806].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author nik0
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

              What if Google says that platform links are useless? Then they will neither help your sites or hurt others.

              Let's be honest, most platform links aren't really about the quality of the resource they point to, but rather who has pushed the button on XRummer or Scrapbox the most. And if we can find the footprints for these platform sites, so can Google.

              For platforms like Wordpress, Google will need to work on an algo that will detect if the link is "in content" or from a comment. This shouldn't be too hard.
              Yeah, I fully agree with you on the platforms that are able to be spammed with Xrumer and/or Scrapebox. But devalueing all "in content" links from a platform like Wordpress just doesn't seem realistic. Too many people use it so they can't say they are useless, I think they help Google in a great way to determine whether a site is "popular" or not. Thats why these blog networks work so very well.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5856319].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                Yeah, I fully agree with you on the platforms that are able to be spammed with Xrumer and/or Scrapebox. But devalueing all "in content" links from a platform like Wordpress just doesn't seem realistic. Too many people use it so they can't say they are useless, I think they help Google in a great way to determine whether a site is "popular" or not. Thats why these blog networks work so very well.
                Just to be clear, I didn't recommend that Google devalue in content links. Just the opposite. Google needs to find a way to detect whether links are in the content or in comments. I don't think this would be too difficult.
                Signature
                Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5857127].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          If I were Mr. Google, I'd downgrade platform links, which I think they are already starting to do.

          Platform links are those that are placed on sites using popular platforms and have common footprints like "powered by phpboard" or "powered by wordpress".
          I was thinking the same thing. People often claim that google loves Wordpress but just think what would happen to 90% of Imers if they started combining the WP foot print with thin sites. It would wipe out a lot of people who won't even look at another CMS. So many people who I have met here allow wordpress to "wag the dog". No matter what they want to achieve with their site it just has to be wordpress even if its not the best option for that site.

          In fact there are people reading this now that will swear that Wordpress is ALWAYS the best choice for ANY kind of site.

          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          .But on the other hand, Google should only reduce the value of these links, not punish sites that have them. If they punish sites, expect "negative SEO" to become popular.
          That I disagree on. Google's algos aren't just a matter of one layer. You could be right if google just says - this site has bad links so penalize them. However I don't see that as the way they do things. Some things in the algo are not activated until there are multiple circumstances that trigger them. So it would look like this.

          Page has spammy links pointing at it - check that against the content of the site, then check that against the profile of the non spammy links, then check that against the past rank of the page before the page got the spammy links, then check that against the LSI of the page. all checks in - penalize sites ranking.


          The site looks good for some checks - do not activate penalty.

          So the idea that you could do negative SEO on all sites wouldn't apply. Some factors on page and separate non spammy links in the page's profile off page would protect it.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5856202].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post


            That I disagree on. Google's algos aren't just a matter of one layer. You could be right if google just says - this site has bad links so penalize them. However I don't see that as the way they do things. Some things in the algo are not activated until there are multiple circumstances that trigger them. So it would look like this.

            Page has spammy links pointing at it - check that against the content of the site, then check that against the profile of the non spammy links, then check that against the past rank of the page before the page got the spammy links, then check that against the LSI of the page. all checks in - penalize sites ranking.


            The site looks good for some checks - do not activate penalty.

            So the idea that you could do negative SEO on all sites wouldn't apply. Some factors on page and separate non spammy links in the page's profile off page would protect it.
            You bring up some very valid points. But IMO, it's easier for Google to simply find a remedy for the platform links, then not give them any value, good or bad. Because, it's possible that someone builds a page/site with quality content, gets some quality links, then gets spammy platform links to that page to boost its rank.
            Signature
            Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
            Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5857177].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

              Because, it's possible that someone builds a page/site with quality content, gets some quality links, then gets spammy platform links to that page to boost its rank.
              Thats certainly true but the bigger picture is that google cares about the search results primarily. If the site ranking at the top has good quality and meets the users expectation then yes they have to say they are against the spammy links but its not really that big a deal if it doesn't junk up their results and satisfies the searcher.

              Look at what happened with JC penney for the same thing. What did they get? a 30 day or was it a 60 day slap on the wrist? what people don't get (not you but others) is that if Google could nuke every site for every search except 100-200 top quality sites (actually much less) that answer what the searcher was looking for they would be quite fine doing so. All they need their algo to do is take out the trash (from their perspective) not do right or be fair to every site out there.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5857348].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jeff Hampton
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      A quick point: Google can't do too much to downgrade sites with "unnatural" off page linking...If they do, expect "negative SEO" to be the new catch phrase as degenerate SEOers begin to focus on destroying the competition, instead of building their own SEO.
      "And we are also looking at the people who abuse it, who put too many keywords on a page, exchange way too many links..."

      Matt Cutts
      Google to Penalize Over-SEO'd Sites | News & Opinion | PCMag.com
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5856150].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author giseo
    “Over-Optimization” has always been penalized. Not sure what this is about now.
    Signature

    Tired about blogging about tedious subjects like blue widgets and four slice toasters? Learn how to have fun and profit blogging about a continually growing massive multi-billion industry. Find out how to do it for only $5 here!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854782].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seoforu
    Yes right, Google is certainly working on over optimization penalty. Good websites providing a lot of unique content need not to worry a lot. Be sure to check your title tags, description tags, H1 tags and the use of keyword with respect to the content(keyword density). Also keep an eye on the anchor text used to link pages. Think like human and see that you are ranking for keywords for which you should rank. Your webpages should not spam the web.
    Signature

    Guest post links are effective when they are contextual and natural!!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854816].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by seoforu View Post

      Yes right, Google is certainly working on over optimization penalty. Good websites providing a lot of unique content need not to worry a lot. Be sure to check your title tags, description tags, H1 tags and the use of keyword with respect to the content(keyword density). Also keep an eye on the anchor text used to link pages. Think like human and see that you are ranking for keywords for which you should rank. Your webpages should not spam the web.
      You dropped the ball with that one (keyword density).

      Keyword density is one of the easiest things for Google to pick up on. It's not even SEO, it's keyword stuffing & should be avoided.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854847].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Juvv2096
    I think people who have 1 page squeeze pages will have the most problems. People who meta stuff as well and have high keyword density.
    Signature
    Web 2.0 Explosion - Hand Made Web 2.0's
    Ranks Drop After Blog Network Crash? Get Them Back!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5858969].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TopicBay
      Banned
      [DELETED]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5859071].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by TopicBay View Post

        It would seem that Google are going to continue championing quality, original content over all else.

        Hurray - for those that already provide original, quality and informative content.

        The old adage that ''content is king'' is finally becoming truth
        Content by itself isn't going to get any decent SERP rankings.

        You'll still need to do SEO & format that content in an SEO friendly way, which believe it or not will also make the page very user friendly (If done correctly).

        I'm a fan of how wikipedia builds their pages, it's great for SEO & very user friendly, anyone can do the same, just scale it way down to fit your site. Wikipedia is a very good model to base a site on, I would tweak it a little to add a few more things as far as SEO, but overall they know what their doing.

        The thing that a lot of people just don't get (not you, just people in general), is they don't know how to differentiate SEO & spam. Example, how many times have we all seen the WF forum threads & people asking what the correct keyword density is? I just feel sorry for those people considering they've obviously fallen for some sales pitch.

        Google doesn't care what people call it, keyword density, keyword stuffing, it's still over-optimized pages & they'll find out soon enough.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5859931].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sck4784
    Will it suffer "Good SEO optimized" websites?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5860975].message }}

Trending Topics