Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Google? Spam? Ads? No... No Conflict of Interest Here...
Renegade:
And more:
Original (I believe):
http://www.ureader.com/msg/10111337.aspx
Stolen results:
http://www.google.com/search?q=C%23+rgb+to+WdColorIndex
Google? Spam? Ads? No... No Conflict of Interest Here...
Stolen content:
http://thedailyreviewer.com/windowsapps/view/finding-higlights-a-specific-color-11880449
The original isn't in the search results.
Sigh... There's just no end to it. This happens to me ALL the time.
Renegade:
Original:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/software/aspnet/33784682/refactoring-from-vba-to-c.aspx
Stolen:
http://thedailyreviewer.com/windowsapps/view/refactoring-from-vba-to-c-106121758
Search (got original):
http://www.google.com/search?q=C%23+rgb+to+WdColorIndex
Search (got stolen):
http://www.google.com/search?q=C%23+WdColorIndex+vs+wdcolor
Stolen search screenshot:
Google? Spam? Ads? No... No Conflict of Interest Here...
Renegade:
And another...
http://www.thecodecage.com/forumz/members-word-vba-programming/44880-refactoring-visual-basic-applications-c.html
I saw that stolen somewhere else, just forget where now... It's just nutty how much stolen content is out there.
Renegade:
And another...
http://www.thecodecage.com/forumz/members-word-vba-programming/44880-refactoring-visual-basic-applications-c.html
I saw that stolen somewhere else, just forget where now... It's just nutty how much stolen content is out there.
-Renegade (January 29, 2011, 06:52 PM)
--- End quote ---
Ooops -- looks like Egghead cafe is the thief, or these guys are:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/software/aspnet/33784682/refactoring-from-vba-to-c.aspx
Not sure who anymore!?!?!?! :huh: :o :tellme:
Bamse:
Bots and automated ranking must have difficulties in judging content with quotes/attributions and those without - can we not assume that is a parameter in 2011? The Daily Reviewer does mention they are using other sites content though, more than can be said about many other sites. Why they rank so high is another question. If they can scrape content they can also make it clear where it come from - is separated on purpose which is a major violation of common behavior when quoting/making content based on 3rd party material. Not up for debate in any way. Such a broad announcement they have on top of page is no good for individual articles which users run into via search results. Google bot should figure that out.
If Google started to punish not mentioning where content come from seo/marking people behind crappy sites will start to experiment with how to fool bot into believing they have lived up to request while necessary info is practically invisible to user. Much like TOS including use of Google Analytics etc. They will probably succeed. So manual cleaning is necessary. Only punishment that works without getting into excluding/censoring debate is to put violating sites back at the bus - lowering parameter no. 248 a notch as part of a mile long algorithm thought out by the brightest brains is not enough, back at the bus must be literally way way back. They are still present at Google but not easy to find ;) If they make examples of this message will be heard, minor change in ranking is not really solution to real problems. Will just make idiotic site admins work tirelessly to accommodate "new rules" and continue coming up with new ones of their own.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version