Grim... wrote:Personally, I think that's the wrong thing to do.
First, read the blog entry that details *why*:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/ramping-u ... l-webspam/
Next, key points:
- Its not permanent. In fact, it lasted less than 72 hours.
- Worst case scenario is 180 days, only if the webmaster doesn't respond at all, and doesn't change his tactics.
- "I just don't think it's right that Google gets to choose what result we (it's customers) get to see" : Then use another search engine.
- Its google's algorithm, google's data, google's right to do as they please. If you don't like their actions, use another engine. Its powerful and popular *because* they do what they do.
- They totally set their priorities: By making clear that they will not be lied to, they are telling the net at large to be honest. That results in better search results, and thats what google tries to do.
- Read through the blog posting and tell me HOW they could possibly not weigh the 'fake' results heavier. This is another site weighting itself heavily - not Gooogle overweighing SEO.
- They didn't de-rank them. They removed them from the index. Removing them means they are simply not displayed. Once they stop cheating (apparently, that is already in process), they will be listed again (apparently that is already in process as well), and their rank will be evaulated like everyone else.
- "If I'm doing a search for bmw, wouldn't you think that bmw.de is a relevant site?" - The answer is *NO*. If you read the page, as it was before, the page was NOT relevant. By what standard? By the standard of what content was in the page! There was almost no text giving it relevance to people. There were pictures of cars, and little else. Few pages linked to it, so the only way they could get a rank was to *cheat*. Instead of building a page that was USEFUL to people, they fooled the search engine into thinking it was relevant.
(Note: Being the correct choice for a search is NOT the same as containing relevant information. That mismatch is where your frustration stems from - not Google's actions).
Flat out, if you read the blog, with the explanation, there are only a few reasonable conclusions:
- BMW had a site with virtually zero useful information in text.
- BMW attempted to lie to Google.
- Google, after attempting to fix the situation, removed them from their index.
- BMW in turn said "You are right, we shouldnt do that"
- Google in return said "Welcome back".
No foul at all in the end. An excellent outcome that will result in a page with more informative value for customers.