Ping Stacey about what Sam said

That commercial thing is a theory as it would explain what happened to
my site. All the poster pages were clearly affiliate-oriented and
therefore commercial which could explain what happened. Also what you
said could explain it, and also what I said could explain it, or it
could be all three a bit or something else that hasn't come up yet.
But I don't think you can ignore what Sam says, it may be a factor for
a lot of sites where perhaps the commercial, by which I mean selling
direct from the site, has overtaken the informational, by which I mean
merely advising of a service commercially available. We'd need to be
considering more sites, I think, we need more examples.
Further, I did a little digging, some of my pages had whole chunks
repeated on sites taken down by the time I found out about them, and
get this; Copyscape think that part of ezygoal.com is my site! I don't
suppose associations like that help any.

BB.
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
The buffalo have gone

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

That commercial thing is a theory as it would explain what happened to
my site. All the poster pages were clearly affiliate-oriented and
therefore commercial which could explain what happened.

If commerical sites were losing. I don't see it. My site sells something. I
also had a little bit of Amazon stuff on it. What I think happened to your
site is that 1. your PR is to low, 2. you have to much going on the site and
it was pulling away from the relatedness to SEO. I am still thinking those
links I mentioned may have some small play in it also.

Also what you
said could explain it, and also what I said could explain it, or it
could be all three a bit or something else that hasn't come up yet.
But I don't think you can ignore what Sam says, it may be a factor for
a lot of sites where perhaps the commercial, by which I mean selling
direct from the site, has overtaken the informational, by which I mean
merely advising of a service commercially available.

Like I said I don't see it. Do some searches and you will see some sites
still ranking just fine that are commerical. What you have to look at is why
just some site losing. Each site probably has different reasons behind why
it slips down, but surely can't be because of a commerical reason.

Here are a few more examples:

Appliances:
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&...n&q=appliances
Look at who is still at top. They are still there and will probably stay
there. They are kings of appliances. They are very commerical.

Kitchen Accessories:
http://www.google.com/search?q=kitch...20%2CSNYC%3Aen
Just look at those also. Bed and Bath, Lehmans, etc all commerical and have
been there for a while also.

Like I have said before I haven't dropped with any of them except Florida
and it was just for a little bit of time. My site is commerical isn't it? If
Google had to knock down commerical sites then it would take them all down.

We'd need to be
considering more sites, I think, we need more examples.

I just gave you a couple more examples of proving that it isn't a commerical
thing.

Further, I did a little digging, some of my pages had whole chunks
repeated on sites taken down by the time I found out about them, and
get this; Copyscape think that part of ezygoal.com is my site! I don't
suppose associations like that help any.

Humm, well one must keep an eye on what is going on and make sure things
like that don't happen. Even you have said many times people move down and
someone takes their spot. Is there any site above you shouldn't be there
that isn't about SEO? That is just the breaks of the search engines. Someone
does it better and gains positions while others lose.

Stacey

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:58:09 +0100, "Stacey"
<stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:01npo15i9faa97pliljf08r66ejoa2k3t3 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
That commercial thing is a theory as it would explain what happened to
my site. All the poster pages were clearly affiliate-oriented and
therefore commercial which could explain what happened.

If commerical sites were losing. I don't see it. My site sells something. I
also had a little bit of Amazon stuff on it. What I think happened to your
site is that 1. your PR is to low, 2. you have to much going on the site and
it was pulling away from the relatedness to SEO. I am still thinking those
links I mentioned may have some small play in it also.

Also what you
said could explain it, and also what I said could explain it, or it
could be all three a bit or something else that hasn't come up yet.
But I don't think you can ignore what Sam says, it may be a factor for
a lot of sites where perhaps the commercial, by which I mean selling
direct from the site, has overtaken the informational, by which I mean
merely advising of a service commercially available.

Like I said I don't see it. Do some searches and you will see some sites
still ranking just fine that are commerical. What you have to look at is why
just some site losing. Each site probably has different reasons behind why
it slips down, but surely can't be because of a commerical reason.

Here are a few more examples:

Appliances:
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&...n&q=appliances
Look at who is still at top. They are still there and will probably stay
there. They are kings of appliances. They are very commerical.

Kitchen Accessories:
http://www.google.com/search?q=kitch...20%2CSNYC%3Aen
Just look at those also. Bed and Bath, Lehmans, etc all commerical and have
been there for a while also.

Have been there for a while. Established. Have provenance, harking
back to what I was saying about what Google respects a while back.
These sites are established in their serps as what they are. Mine had
been through a shift in status from one kind of site to another. Mind,
it still contained far far more relevant material than a lot of sites
currently ranking higher so I think I'm on the way back.
To return to my point, though, I wonder, were Sam's sites all purely
affiliate or were they built round informational sites with steady
serps?
We dunno and he won't tell us, I imagine.

Like I have said before I haven't dropped with any of them except Florida
and it was just for a little bit of time. My site is commerical isn't it?

Yes and it's established as such and in the field of commercial sites
it retained its position. How about the ratios of info sites to
commercial sites in the serps, did that change, with loads of info
sites magically appearing at the top of the serps and
commercially-oriented sites plunging? Sounds a bit that way, doesn't
it? I'm suggesting maybe your site stayed at the top as there weren't
loads of quality pure info sites available for your precise serps.

BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
The buffalo have gone

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:58:09 +0100, "Stacey"
stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

<snip>

Have been there for a while. Established. Have provenance, harking
back to what I was saying about what Google respects a while back.
These sites are established in their serps as what they are. Mine had
been through a shift in status from one kind of site to another. Mind,
it still contained far far more relevant material than a lot of sites
currently ranking higher so I think I'm on the way back.
To return to my point, though, I wonder, were Sam's sites all purely
affiliate or were they built round informational sites with steady
serps?
We dunno and he won't tell us, I imagine.

But you see ya didn't say that. You said commerical period. Now if you look
how it was when I started I knocked down several sites that are not at the
top no more.:-) I seen what you did with your site and it was good to remove
all that non related stuff. Yes, you are right I do think they is a point of
estabashlishing what your site is about. But you can also change it and make
it something else.....just don't make it to much about a lot of stuff that
doesn't matter.

Sam's site's well we know what he does don't we. He comment spams. He might
have just got caught. What happened if Google just decided that comment
pages were not used, or maybe those people fixed those comments and removed
them or whatever. He is in a porn industry a fast moving pace, one comes up
others go down. That is how it works someone might have better links than
he.

Like I have said before I haven't dropped with any of them except Florida
and it was just for a little bit of time. My site is commerical isn't it?

Yes and it's established as such and in the field of commercial sites
it retained its position. How about the ratios of info sites to
commercial sites in the serps, did that change, with loads of info
sites magically appearing at the top of the serps and
commercially-oriented sites plunging? Sounds a bit that way, doesn't
it? I'm suggesting maybe your site stayed at the top as there weren't
loads of quality pure info sites available for your precise serps.

Well, my informative site didn't gain ranks so that theory is blown in the
water again. And nope a lot of info related sites didn't gain anything, in
fact the top 10 has been pretty steady. I have looked at the SEO SERPs and
to tell you there are SEO sites that came up....they are not just
informational. I follow a few more SERPs and this didn't happen either to
them.

BTW I have gone more affiliate and I am already gain pretty good hits for
few links on a sub domain. I am not lost in the water with it. So, still I
don't see it.

Stacey

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:30:53 +0100, "Stacey"
<Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:tjspo19g98b6tfrm4912ie5bacd7jqo6h3 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:58:09 +0100, "Stacey"
stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

snip


Have been there for a while. Established. Have provenance, harking
back to what I was saying about what Google respects a while back.
These sites are established in their serps as what they are. Mine had
been through a shift in status from one kind of site to another. Mind,
it still contained far far more relevant material than a lot of sites
currently ranking higher so I think I'm on the way back.
To return to my point, though, I wonder, were Sam's sites all purely
affiliate or were they built round informational sites with steady
serps?
We dunno and he won't tell us, I imagine.

But you see ya didn't say that. You said commerical period.

Oh! Oh! Did not! I defined it as selling direct from the site.

Now if you look
how it was when I started I knocked down several sites that are not at the
top no more.:-) I seen what you did with your site and it was good to remove
all that non related stuff. Yes, you are right I do think they is a point of
estabashlishing what your site is about. But you can also change it and make
it something else.....just don't make it to much about a lot of stuff that
doesn't matter.

Sam's site's well we know what he does don't we. He comment spams.

Does he? How'd you know? I know he spams but I thought he was a
blog-spammer or similar linking-type spammer.

He might
have just got caught. What happened if Google just decided that comment
pages were not used, or maybe those people fixed those comments and removed
them or whatever. He is in a porn industry a fast moving pace, one comes up
others go down. That is how it works someone might have better links than
he.

Like I have said before I haven't dropped with any of them except Florida
and it was just for a little bit of time. My site is commerical isn't it?

Yes and it's established as such and in the field of commercial sites
it retained its position. How about the ratios of info sites to
commercial sites in the serps, did that change, with loads of info
sites magically appearing at the top of the serps and
commercially-oriented sites plunging? Sounds a bit that way, doesn't
it? I'm suggesting maybe your site stayed at the top as there weren't
loads of quality pure info sites available for your precise serps.

Well, my informative site didn't gain ranks so that theory is blown in the
water again. And nope a lot of info related sites didn't gain anything, in
fact the top 10 has been pretty steady. I have looked at the SEO SERPs and
to tell you there are SEO sites that came up....they are not just
informational. I follow a few more SERPs and this didn't happen either to
them.

BTW I have gone more affiliate and I am already gain pretty good hits for
few links on a sub domain.

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here speaks Stacey some days.

I am not lost in the water with it. So, still I
don't see it.

Sigh. I'l mosey over and have a look if I may, Stacey darlin':-)

BB

--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
The buffalo have gone

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:30:53 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:tjspo19g98b6tfrm4912ie5bacd7jqo6h3 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:58:09 +0100, "Stacey"
stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

snip


Have been there for a while. Established. Have provenance, harking
back to what I was saying about what Google respects a while back.
These sites are established in their serps as what they are. Mine had
been through a shift in status from one kind of site to another. Mind,
it still contained far far more relevant material than a lot of sites
currently ranking higher so I think I'm on the way back.
To return to my point, though, I wonder, were Sam's sites all purely
affiliate or were they built round informational sites with steady
serps?
We dunno and he won't tell us, I imagine.

But you see ya didn't say that. You said commerical period.

Oh! Oh! Did not! I defined it as selling direct from the site.

Oh well you said what to look over again what Sam siad and Sam was saying
commericial.:-) So, ok you didn't.

Now if you look
how it was when I started I knocked down several sites that are not at the
top no more.:-) I seen what you did with your site and it was good to
remove
all that non related stuff. Yes, you are right I do think they is a point
of
estabashlishing what your site is about. But you can also change it and
make
it something else.....just don't make it to much about a lot of stuff that
doesn't matter.

Sam's site's well we know what he does don't we. He comment spams.

Does he? How'd you know?

I have seen it, he also blog spams. All one has to do is look and you will
see.
http://www.google.com/search?num=100...22&btnG=Search

I know he spams but I thought he was a
blog-spammer or similar linking-type spammer.

Any type of link he will go for it.:-) He kind of has to really in his field
if you think about it. They all spam.

<snip>

BTW I have gone more affiliate and I am already gain pretty good hits for
few links on a sub domain.

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here speaks Stacey some days.

Speaks Stacey? I only got a few links on a sub domain and I have already
gain good hits. My Christmas sub domain is
christmas-decor-gifts.staceyssimplestuff.com. Already gaining over 400
uniques per day and it just went live a little over 2 weeks ago.

I am not lost in the water with it. So, still I
don't see it.

Sigh. I'l mosey over and have a look if I may, Stacey darlin':-)

Go right ahead Billy Boo.:-)

Stacey

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:22:12 +0100, "Stacey"
<Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:uo4ro1her5bmc05ruu0m8qisfki1cricmv (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:30:53 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:tjspo19g98b6tfrm4912ie5bacd7jqo6h3 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:58:09 +0100, "Stacey"
stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

snip


Have been there for a while. Established. Have provenance, harking
back to what I was saying about what Google respects a while back.
These sites are established in their serps as what they are. Mine had
been through a shift in status from one kind of site to another. Mind,
it still contained far far more relevant material than a lot of sites
currently ranking higher so I think I'm on the way back.
To return to my point, though, I wonder, were Sam's sites all purely
affiliate or were they built round informational sites with steady
serps?
We dunno and he won't tell us, I imagine.

But you see ya didn't say that. You said commerical period.

Oh! Oh! Did not! I defined it as selling direct from the site.

Oh well you said what to look over again what Sam siad and Sam was saying
commericial.:-) So, ok you didn't.


Now if you look
how it was when I started I knocked down several sites that are not at the
top no more.:-) I seen what you did with your site and it was good to
remove
all that non related stuff. Yes, you are right I do think they is a point
of
estabashlishing what your site is about. But you can also change it and
make
it something else.....just don't make it to much about a lot of stuff that
doesn't matter.

Sam's site's well we know what he does don't we. He comment spams.

Does he? How'd you know?

I have seen it, he also blog spams. All one has to do is look and you will
see.
http://www.google.com/search?num=100...22&btnG=Search

wow - is he the Chrissy's Bedroom guy? You know, I have a
bedroom...somewhere...

I know he spams but I thought he was a
blog-spammer or similar linking-type spammer.


Any type of link he will go for it.:-) He kind of has to really in his field
if you think about it. They all spam.

snip

BTW I have gone more affiliate and I am already gain pretty good hits for
few links on a sub domain.

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here speaks Stacey some days.

Speaks Stacey? I only got a few links on a sub domain and I have already
gain good hits. My Christmas sub domain is
christmas-decor-gifts.staceyssimplestuff.com. Already gaining over 400
uniques per day and it just went live a little over 2 weeks ago.

I am not lost in the water with it. So, still I
don't see it.

Sigh. I'l mosey over and have a look if I may, Stacey darlin':-)


Go right ahead Billy Boo.:-)

Stacey

I will! Only, it seems to be a pop3 password changer site, like part
of a control panel!

BB



--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
The buffalo have gone

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:22:12 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:
snip

I will! Only, it seems to be a pop3 password changer site, like part
of a control panel!

Mine this one? http://christmas-decor-gifts.staceyssimplestuff.com/ ????

Don't know why you are getting that.

Stacey

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:50:19 +0100, "Stacey"
<Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:sucro11rlkt83arsq40065nah8u63ncogc (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:22:12 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:
snip


I will! Only, it seems to be a pop3 password changer site, like part
of a control panel!

Mine this one? http://christmas-decor-gifts.staceyssimplestuff.com/ ????

Don't know why you are getting that.

Stacey

Stick a www in there (habit!). Is that a problem, potentially?

BB

--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
The buffalo have gone

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:50:19 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:sucro11rlkt83arsq40065nah8u63ncogc (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:22:12 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:
snip


I will! Only, it seems to be a pop3 password changer site, like part
of a control panel!

Mine this one? http://christmas-decor-gifts.staceyssimplestuff.com/ ????

Don't know why you are getting that.

Stacey

Stick a www in there (habit!). Is that a problem, potentially?

Nope don't have it, I have been doing away with the www alias on all my new
domains. Been doing it for a year now.:-) Makes it easier and not worrying
about double pages indexed.

Stacey