Jagger theory.

**brian.mark** · #1 (**permalink**) 10-26-2005, 01:01 AM

Ok, so here is a theory I'd like people to comment on.

Most of us have heard about Google's webmaster alerts when a site is being removed from the SERPs. It's pretty new, so it hasn't done a whole lot yet. So, what's one way to allow it to do a whole bunch of testing?

My theory, which I invite anyone to comment on, is that all of the filtering for spam has been removed. Once the engine has been able to detect spam and noticed that it hasn't been removed in a given time period (a mistake will be fixed quickly, spamming won't), those webmasters will receive alerts and start being removed. From what I've heard in some private channels, it normally takes just over a week from when something major is done to a page for the results to get filtered, and as long as 3 or 4 weeks for other things to be detected and filtered.

This, to me, explains a few of the things that Jagger has brought up.

1) SPAM in the SERPs.

2) Several rounds of updates according to the blog here and here.

3) Starting to see some of the SPAM sites falling now that just over a week has passed.

Anyone else care to comment on this theory?

Brian.

MtraX · #2 (**permalink**) 10-26-2005, 02:25 AM

Hi

Maybe they've slackened their spam filtering, or changed the way it's filtered (i.e. filter sites that trigger multiple flags), but I can't believe they totally removed it. It does however make sense though, but how long will they give someone to fix the issue? A week? Two weeks? If there's no spam filtering, it means that any given blackhat can spam the hell out of Google and make a bunch of cash in 1-2 weeks time (for getting top 3 position) and just repeat the process with another domain name. Not too sure about that.

MtraX

glengara · #3 (**permalink**) 10-26-2005, 02:59 AM

From what I've read, the notices are sent for minor infringements that may even be accidental and where the site is seen as worth "saving", it doesn't seem like a "full-on" spammer would get this e-mail....

aaron2005 · #4 (**permalink**) 10-26-2005, 07:24 AM

That theory is perfect.

Yes indeed.

DMC_34 · #5 (**permalink**) 10-26-2005, 08:38 AM

Well, I didnt see any change in Jagger2. Same spam sites in top 10. More Corporate link giants moving up. Personally, overall the results were better this pre-Joker update.

DMC

greeneagle · #6 (**permalink**) 10-27-2005, 05:56 AM

I thought about this thread for a day or 2, and the more I do, the more sense it makes.

Their corporate culture has always been one that seeks to reduce overhead using the public's assistance, mostly in reducing R&D expenditure.

Maybe the algs just are not advanced enough to sort real adword vrs spam adword sites yet. Maybe the actually need the public's help. The last (prior to "Jagger" attempted to sort out "directories". Maybe it flat out failed. There has been a public cryout in the last quarter against those kind of sites. This may also explain the considerable change in IBLs for some sites.

Maybe the rapid revenue growth has become their "achilles heel".

Ken