PDA

View Full Version : Lesson in spamdexing


JuniorHarris
08-10-2001, 09:33/09:33AM
I usually do not post spam sites, as there are just way too many examples out there! However, this one did catch my eye!~ :eyes:

If you can get past the redirect and the fact that it is spam, you will find some interesting insight as to content placement and meta/anchor tag coding which could help positioning.

Not that one should spam to achieve it, but the strategy and placement are sound. However, I would not recommend duplicating the spam techniques, such as multiple title tags or invalid form field names.

Below is a copy of my message to MSN and inktomi:

While searching on MSN I found the following URL listed,
http://www.betterposition.com/i/16th/16th.htm. I do not remember the keywords used, however what I did notice was the redirect to a completely irrelevant site.

With redirection disabled or using: view-source:http://www.betterposition.com/i/16th/16th.htm in internet explorer, one can see the true intent to manipulate and dilute the quality of the search results.

Please pass this on to one of your technical engineers. Only one inspection is necessary to find "content" used to manipulate position, which is totally unrelated to the "re-directed" destination page.

This domain appears to have several pages listed, but also noted what appears to be "paid index" listings through redirect-west.inktomi. So there may be another "domain match" opportunity for such activities by reviewing the appropriate subscription URLs as well.

Thanks in advance.

Sincerely,
Junior Harris

ihelpyou
08-10-2001, 09:43/09:43AM
hmmm.... looks like that is an SEO who is redirecting only to keep track of clicks for the client who is "Hotjobs".

This is an example of a VERY bad way to do SEO work. Very easy to get caught by Many as is shown by JH. Things like this are reported in a heartbeat. Not only does it hurt the unsuspecting client's site, it hurts the SEO as well. It is stuff like this that gives SEO a bad name and should not be tolerated.

Another reason why SEO should not be charging on "clicks". Are we a PPC engine? I think not.

ihelpyou
08-10-2001, 09:49/09:49AM
<META NAME='robots' CONTENT='noarchive'>

That is also in the tags. Gee, I wonder why they do not want Google to cache the original code? :D

That is one of the worse SPAM jobs I have ever seen.

ihelpyou
08-10-2001, 09:54/09:54AM
On second look, The SEO might be an affiliate of hotjobs as JH points out the original code is spammed. duh.

JuniorHarris
08-10-2001, 10:24/10:24AM
LOL!~ I noticed the noarchive tag as well. However I didn't bother reporting it to Google, as the site/page is not listed!~ So apparently Google has already noticed their deception!~ :eyes:

>That is one of the worse SPAM jobs I have ever seen.

This is true, but one may still glean tips from their code. It does provide examples of spider sweet spots, which could be implemented using legitimate and tactful design techniques.

Albeit, it is spam in the worst way. But it also reflects a solid technical template for high optimization techniques.