Comments on: Anything you register can and will be held against you…

By: Cshel SEO and PR » Blog Archive » Long overdue post: SMX wrap-up

Cshel SEO and PR » Blog Archive » Long overdue post: SMX wrap-up — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:54:59 +0000

[...] Roundtable. I got to chat with Matt Cutts in the press room for a little while. Cleared up some residual questions from the Vegas PubCon thing. The group photo was slightly disappointing because there just no way everyone could get into [...]

By: Questions in SEO that I Can’t Answer @ Google XML Sitemap Blog

Questions in SEO that I Can’t Answer @ Google XML Sitemap Blog — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 12:23:21 +0000

[...] Does Sharing Registrants with Spammers Hurt You?Matt Cutts recently alluded to the idea that Google knows about all of your domains. Since this is the case, would they be inclined to penalize a high-quality, white hat site if they noticed that dozens or hundreds of other domains from the same registrant were manipulative, low quality spam (assuming you had never attempted to use the spam domains to build link pop for the legit site)? [...]

By: Dennis A

Dennis A — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:44:38 +0000

Look at the traffic detail for “fapomatic.com” on alexa. You can see all the websites owned it’s owner on the left under “See other sites owned”. That’s what happen when you don’t use private registration

By: Cshel SEO » Blog Archive » Google cannot see past private registrations

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 23:12:10 +0000

[...] This whole “can Google see past/around private domain registrations” thing that came out of the Interactive SERP Site Review session at PubCon Vegas has been bothering me a little, not because I’m worried (because I’m not, okay? I’m not). But in the interest of furthering the academic discourse, I decided to do a little research. [...]

By: Anything you register can and will be held against you at innerangst.net

Anything you register can and will be held against you at innerangst.net — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:55:03 +0000

[...] read more | digg story Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: . [...]

By: Surprise, surprise.. Google knows all you sites! - stefanjuhl.com

Surprise, surprise.. Google knows all you sites! - stefanjuhl.com — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:54:42 +0000

[...] First of all I’m pretty sure that this isn’t new. What Matt Cutts did under the ‘Interactive Site Reviews and SERP Quality Control Forum’ session was to “complain” about the guy, which site was being reviewed, having a bunch of semi-related domains. Apparently it came as a shock to many that Google could see this. I believe I saw Matt do almost the exact same thing at PubCon in Orlando back in February 2004. So why was there no buzz about it back then? It must be that the people attending PubCon in 2004 was of a higher technical level and had already realized that this is possible. (no offense..) [...]

By: john_loch

john_loch — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 06:25:18 +0000

Honestly.. who cares anyway. :)

Google will continue trying to unify data for profiling purposes and people will continue to sidestep it.

What a wonderfully connected world we live in :)

By: Shane Pike

Shane Pike — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:14:58 +0000

When they paid to become a registrar, they were very up-front about the fact they had no intention of actually registering domains. They were doing it to get at the underlying data.

While I obviously can’t comment on how they actually use it, it would make sense to me if they used it as a tie-breaker in a case where someone owned three sites with virtually the same content. Not sure if the content was really the same? Look at the registration info for the three domains. Same registrant? Probably the same content then. Two sites get dropped and the third gets to stay. (Not that I’ve ever seen that happen and suggested that the company fix it by moving the registrations for the three domains to separate accounts and then seen all three domains come back into the SERPs or anything.)

By: chippy

chippy — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:04:37 +0000

After the session I heard Matt elaborate: when Google does testing with Joe surfer they say parked domains is one of their top annoyances. So if you have a parked domain either robots.txt it out or use a 301 redirect to an active site. I do not recall any direct mention of devaluing sites based on ownership so maybe it was a just a scare tactic to rouse the masses into compliance.

By: marketfucker

marketfucker — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:40:22 +0000

In the case Google were really even thinking about using this kind of information against webmasters, it is a completely insane idea. A webmaster having 5000 domains has nothing to do with any of his specific sites. One could perfectly have a network of hundreds of spammy, MFA sites, and that shouldn’t have anything to do with another site, owned by the same person, built with perfectly white hat methods. Those sites should be independent, and only related by links and reasonable criteria like that. One could argue that Google could “rightfully” ban the spammy, MFA sites, but I believe that linking that to other independent sites just for being owned by the same person, is one of the most stupid things Google could ever do.

Mixing up things like this would probably even violate a few rights, and in such case (if proven) should be taken to court.

Great Google, “do no evil” just until you don’t like someone (or his domains)…