Todays date: Jun 14 2024
Last blog entry: 7/27/2004
Last Article entry: 12/4/2003

  T's search engine optimization blog, or some will say, diary of a ........ artist, haw ha ha!

"T's search engine optimization Blog and SEO News"

"Opinions are like asseholes, everyone has one, take from mine what you want and forget the rest of it!"
Da' Tmeister, Editor

Blog Posts Archives
h_line2.gif (398 bytes)

This is cloaking -> , , , </snip> Nope, it isn't cloaking, it is quite likely spam but isn't cloaking. It is mirroring sites, look at the Google cached page.

Misconceptions about what is cloaking are the reasons for the confusion surrounding it. The content in the Google cache seemed to be what was on the site so there was no delivery mechanism used to give engines a different page from users.

Whether this is even spam is hard to tell. The one above seems to have already been caught since one is grey barred for PR. The inns site is interesting in that there is a high PR that is exactly the same on all sites and internal pages. I decided to look at the marketing company info and it seems to indicate they are using domain aliasing on the DNS server. So it is very possibly legit. Providing they submit only 1 site to SE. To quote you "and then on each and every one of these other domains they did nothing more than say their base is coming from "". A clear indication of intent.

This would be consistent with domain name registration. You own it you gotta have it on a DNS server. Some were likely purchased for protection and some for keyword marketing. Search google on the domain names, all I tried came up as "" and the cached page was "".

Both keyword marketing and domain protection are legitimate so long as they aren't used in the submission or optimization strategy.

HTTP:// is a correct setting for HTTP:// if you do not have that resolving if the www is left out an error occurs I believe it is a restricted entry or 404 error. Generally this is regarded as poor domain set up.

Using technology as it was intended to be used is good, using it to inflate relevancy or visibility is bad. So if I use DNS to display as then I'm fine. But if I use a redirect from to I'm running a risk because the intent could be seen as trying to inflate visibility. Especially if gets indexed. If I submit both to DMOZ there is absolutely no question about intent you are absolutely using domains to inflate visibility.

This is one of the problems with reporting spam and determining "best practices" for an industry standard. A lot of it is based on intent. Is it legitimate? That depends on whose determining legitimacy. IMHO, too many look at the SERPs and see a lot of pages, or a bunch of domains without regard for how it is legitimately possible to do that. They then say engines are doing a crappy job of preventing spam and the finger pointing begins.

I have clients doing the same thing to separate "online" from offline advertising. I submitted only 1 to engines however, because of links both appear in the SERPs. How can that possibly be spam? Although most looking at the SERPs and seeing both sites are exactly the same would. If they looked at the DNS records they would know how it happened. That is why the mini-site tip on using different networks is misguided. If you don't cross link and you don't promote more than 1 in the engines then build all the sites you want and it shouldn't be a problem. It is spam when you use them to inflate link pop and SE visibility.

Looking at the mini-site strategy from purely a marketing standpoint it is consistent with sound target based or direct marketing techniques. If you look at it from an SEO point of view it is clearly spam. Eliminate the spam using the advice above and you may just be on to something. Don't and you're likely committing SE suicide. Of course because you can't link to it from the site in the SE and you can't submit it, it is impossible to do effectively using separate domains unless of course they are sub-domains, then you're good to go. The best of both worlds.

It is easy for a site to have literally thousands of pages indexed by Google. I was recently looking at Froogle and was amazed at the thoroughness of the indexing. IMHO, Google is going deeper into ecommerce sites and product pages are seemingly better represented then in the past. Domain and "alleged doorways" complaints are the least understood spam techniques. They are almost always about the numbers. Eg: 6,000 pages in the index! this is spam. No it's not, it's called knowing what you are doing.

The tent site is clearly spam based on mirroring of content. Believe me when I say mirroring is not about exact duplication. These sites are examples of gross misconduct and how they survive is both discouraging and a source of discontent for me.

To me it just indicates a "thick as thieves" mentality. "I won't tattle because perhaps I'm doing something wrong myself that I don't know about!" It confirms all the BS about all in the industry being scammers who don't really know what they are doing. Could it be those that report spam know how they get results and don't have these worries or is it that they are just individuals of "poor character" as some would have people believe.

Google recently asked SEOs to help by reporting spam, but no, most only complain about spam but do not lift a finger to help even if it is adversely affecting their abilities to perform. SEOs tolerate spammers and that just legitimizes what spammers do consequently outsiders see all SEOs as spammers and scammers until proven otherwise.

Once again all most do is cry about how they are getting a bad rap! Nope no bad rap, as Mr. Bush said "you're either with us or against us" Google should take the same attitude. I wouldn't even be adverse to rewards for reporters of spam! Chricky, it can't be any worse then all the reciprocal linking which is nothing short of a conspiracy to inflate link relevancy. Truth be told 9 out of 10 wouldn't do it if there were no SE gains.

posts on search engine optimization and submission
SEO Hangouts:

SEO Training Dojo w/theGypsy

 For less than the cost of a cuppa' coffee a day?
SEOdojo SEO Training As a certification and training committee member for SeoPros I found theGypsy's SEO Dojo has the best SEO patent library available. Not to mention the incredible peeps to learn with and from! 
h_line1.gif (303 bytes)
Social Media Hangouts:

h_line1.gif (303 bytes)
T's Quote:

"What the mind of man can conceive and believe, It can achieve."

Napolean Hill ~ Think and Grow Rich

v_line.gif v_line.gif

DoJoPeeps to Checkout!
Steve Gerenscer AKA Feydakin
Animal Charms
h_line1.gif (303 bytes)
Webmaster T's New SEO recommendation service. Search engine marketing, campaign monitoring and certification. Rating real results from active campaigns and services. See your site like a search engine does!

search engine optimization articles
  Looking for something you've read in the past in the Blog area or T's qued for publishing. Check the search engine Webmaster T's optimization and SEO Blog archives. If it was on the cover you'll find it there.
h_line1.gif (303 bytes)
Archived search engine placement and web development articles.

T's World Logo,  cover and awards graphics 
by and Copyright 1997-2009  Markus Gemstad 
Copyright 1997-2009 International Website Builders all rights reserved.