Steve/Tony/Trent/whatever the heck your name is....I would not say something lightly.

It was very cute of you to park the domain as of this morning.

I will tell you the tie...other then the sites being the same ol' thing...BTW, it is rather funny that you decided to take it offline just because I posted.

Your job ads, http://losangeles.craigslist.org/bus/4777524.html

and

this one, list your phone number and contact information as:

quote:

---

Call 888-835-8222 and leave your contact information.

---

Was it just bad luck that searchconversion, which was up and running just a few hours ago has the same phone number? 877-605-6882

Again, I am really cracking up that you actually took it offline!

I guess you won't mind about all of the doorways, mostly to affilaite links, will be off line here soon as well.

No. I retract nothing. I would apologize if I were wrong, but I am not. You can "legal action" if you like, but I think you are going to have to start with even proving your name, which isn't going to work now, is it?

quote:

---

You've made the claim that our clients have been banned in Google, which is absolutely not true.

---

You misunderstood. YOU are banned, and ONE of your clients. I only recently received a more up to date list and have not checked any of them in Google. I am busy working on my report to Yahoo. But, since you claim not to be associated with any spam these obviously aren't your doorways and you have nothing to be unhappy about.

What ever happened that non-spam example? Still making one?

As I take it from your last thread, whoever owned the singular of that domain had a search engine... strange coincidence I guess... but you assumed that it was us and told everyone it was. One letter in a domain name can mean a world of difference Janet.

Again - you need to be sure that what you're saying is true before you post it in public.

As for posting my client's URL's, I'm sure that if I did that Janet, you would certainly find something wrong with them. I have never claimed to be perfect and there is always room for improvement. Something tells me I wouldnt get a very good review in this forum if I did that.

I do not, however, believe our sites are spam. This thread, if nothing else, should prove to people that this is not a black and white issue. Just as Excel said earlier, there are shades of grey at the edge where there is room for interpretation here. Everyone should be able to have their opinion, but it is what the engines think in the end that matters.

I at least understand now why you seem to be so bitter towards us... you thought it was us who posted that last thread I guess. Apparently, you must deal with a lot of tricksters all day, but you should be careful not to let it cloud your judgement lest you start branding everybody as shady before knowing the truth about them.

As for one of our clients getting banned, as you said, you have no evidence of how or why they were banned. Do you honestly think its because I put a link to them from my site? EVERY site we build gets into Google and STAYS in Google... not every site ranks HIGH in Google, but they ALL get in and not one has ever been banned that I know if.

I am once again asking you to retract the false claim that it was us who posted the last thread about searchconversion.com, as well as the claim that we and our client are banned from Google since you have no evidence of such.

From what I can tell we have a few different factions within the community (as dysfunctional as we are) having an interesting debate with a bit of emotion thrown in for good measure. I'm gonna see if I can summarize a bit and test my own level of understanding of the issues:

Traditional SEO consultants that optimize a client’s site:
There is no question that there is value to this service. It is silly to set up affiliate and cpc programs without first cleaning your own backyard and reaping the benefits of low cost traffic (over time).

Classic Doorways and cloaking:
Violates TOS of most (if not all) search engines. I personally cannot stand doorways, especially if they contain pop ups. I also see the value of cloaking where it improves the user experience. The problem is that this method has been so abused that the engines just kill on site.

Content doorways:
If I have been following the discussion, I think this is what Steve is trying to accomplish. While this should be inline with the submission requirements with the engines as long as the content is unique (don’t just copy the customer’s text), I fear that we will end up with sites that have content put together for the purpose of ranking and driving traffic to another site. I guess it comes down to your intention for the user: Are you trying to get users to your site, or to someone else’s? If all you are trying to do is push the user off your “site” to your customer’s, then I would question the legitimacy of the site.

Janet:
Unless you have other information available to you, I think you are mistaken in your searchconversion.com statement. I believe the correct domain is searchconversions.com (which is still online).

Steve:
Your rent versus buy comparison is good, but I think you are missing a key point. Since you are working in the arena of commerce sites (this is an assumption), shouldn’t the comparison be more along the line of renting to sublet? An example would be:

If you could rent a house for $2,000 and sublet it for $2,500, wouldn’t you? I think the majority of the people within these forums would. Difference is that some would take the $500 a month and save to buy a house, and some would spend it elsewhere.

When it comes to cpc marketing, the ROI must be there for the advertiser to continue. It is just that companies track their return differently (hence the strong opinions here).

I too would be interested to know how Yahoo and Google handle these domains. But I expect that Steve will not post them here…the risk is just too great that they might be removed.

quote:

---

As for posting my client's URL's, I'm sure that if I did that Janet, ... I wouldnt get a very good review in this forum if I did that.

---

Actually I would be fair. But, no reason for you to believe that. But, that is OK, I will post a list myself. My list is all spammy...I was just giving you a chance to post non-spammy ones.

quote:

---

I at least understand now why you seem to be so bitter towards us... you thought it was us who posted that last thread I guess

---

quote:

---

As for one of our clients getting banned, as you said, you have no evidence of how or why they were banned. Do you honestly think its because I put a link to them from my site?

---

You are right, I have no access to the Google logs as to why a site was banned. I can tell you it is, but not exactly why. It may be the doorway...but it could be something else that they did, not associated with you.

I will report your doorways to Google ASAP. I thought I would have time today, I did not. They started removing the last list I sent 10 days later, they removed some, and I am guessing are waiting for the filter to catch the rest. (that spammer only used one technique, pretty easy to filter out - you are smarter then that one though).

After they are gone I will post the list here. I was only going to deal with the one, but, what the heck, you have given me a really bad time, I may as well get it all.

Think of our sites as information portals. The purpose of them is to provide extremely high quality information to the users who find them. Imagine if we had just owned the portal, and than put a Commision Junction link on it to try and make money from it.

As long as the site is truly there to add informational value, whats wrong with putting a link to another site on it? This is what the internet is all about and this is what millions of sites do.

I could either try to make money on a CPA (cost per action) as with CJ, or just charge a very low CPC... either way its all the same in the end as long as the advertiser is making a good return on their investment.

In a real sense, our sites have evolved to become less affilaite site, and more just high quality "portals" that provide a lot of good information to people. Our earlier sites did not have as much good content as they should have, but over time, we learned that by TRULY making a valuable resource on the net, with tons of unique content on it, you really can add value to the search engines, to the user, AND to the advertiser... everyone wins.

Again, I dont think the term "doorway" really could possible describe what we do any more than calling every site with a commission junction affiliate link on it a doorway.

It is possible that Janet has seen one of our earlier sites which I wouldnt be proud of if used to represent our company as a whole. I also think, however, every legitimate SEO has ben trying to get better and better at conforming to every possible regulation the engines have and be totally straighforward... and if even the most honest SEO firm here were put in this intense of a spotlight, something bad would be found in the closet. No one is perfect, but this forum gravely punishes anyone for any mistakes. I guess it all comes with the territory.

Thanks for the opinion though... I would welcome any further discussion.

I found a couple that I do not need to clean from Yahoo. Would you like me to post them after I check their Google status?

Also, I did find ONE that isn't like the others. It actually does have some content...I will leave it alone. It might be a doorway, but it isn't all that spammy.

Our TruckXpressions from this thread, and Trevor, the spammer from http://searchengineforums.com/Forum34/HTML/000173.html , share the same isp! I know it is possible, but what are the odds! 4 million to one? More? Less? Pretty weird! )I honestly have no idea how many isp's there are in the world, 4 million is a wild guess.)

If these aren't spam Yahoo will not delete them. And, yes, his doorways are indeed in Yahoo. Content free.

If this is what Yahoo is coming too, a trash heap instead of a directory, I will find someone else to moderate the forum.

People complain about the spam there, I am just helping clean some out.

As much as you and I have debated here tonight, I actually really do respect your knowledge of search engines. I think some of the hostility in this thread between us was based on the misunderstanding that we had spammed your forum before but all I can do is tell you honestly that it wasnt us.

You have asked me if I would like you to post the sites you have found which you believe to be spam.

I will answer you in this way...

I have admitted that our earliest sites contained some redirects, which I know are not good, but there are really only a few out there and that was from a long time ago so I really wouldnt mind if all those were gone. We do not use cloaking or doorway page generators or anything like that so the sites you're describing really dont sound like ours, but perhaps they are and we're just using different terms.

Since our early days, we have been building out content sites. As time went on, our sites began having more and more good valuable content as we got better and hired better researches and copywriters.

Janet - whether you believe me or not, I truly believe that the content sites we're building today really do add value to the search engine indexes. Anyone searching for that topic would find a lot of good valuable info on our newer sites. We spend ALOT of time and money paying people to research and write good content.

I am actually very proud of of our newer sites.

That doesnt mean that some search engines might determine that there is not enough content on some of our older sites, but we actually have plans to go back and update ALL our sites with more good content.
how good our company actually is.

While you have this ability, I would ask you to instead send me an email with the sites that you believe to be spam with why you think they're spam. I will give you my word that I will not change any of them in any way... if I do, you would certainly post that on the forum and embarrass us since it would make us look like we were trying to hide.

In this way, I could first of all verify that the sites are ours, and than also get your feedback as to why you think they're spam... and if its bevause they dont have enough content, than pehaps we could have our copywriters add a lot more content until the sites are actually valuabe information resources for users.

This may seem to some as if I am not confident in our sites, but to those I would say that if anyone were held up to the spotlight of perfection, everyone would have some imperfections found.

Janet - my email is steve@trafficlogic... I am asking that you please send me the links there. If they are spam, than you can still report them if you like, but this way you would at least give me the benefit of the doubt that they do not represent our overall work if they are not good examples.

If you want to post them, there is nothing stopping you, but I guess Im asking you to have a heart here and at least give us the befit of the doubt. I would gladly work with you to show you that we are a legitimate company that works hard and is trying to do things by the book. Perhaps you could help us get even better.

quote:

---

posted by a_newbie
... as long as the content is unique (don’t just copy the customer’s text),...

---

quote:

---

posted by Steve
Think of our sites as information portals. The purpose of them is to provide extremely high quality information to the users who find them.

---

quote:

---

posted by Steve
Again, I dont think the term "doorway" really could possible describe what we do any more than calling every site with a commission junction affiliate link on it a doorway.

---

I agree with a_newbie for the most part. I don't agree with multiple URLs for one site, but if a site is large enough I see no reason not to break it into a few sections and going from there. I see no problem with 'doorways' if they doorways in the traditional sense but instead are content rich and not just duplicating other pages to get just one more term. But then I guess they cease to be doorways and become content pages There is a fine line.

Now, the example that Janet posted and I reviewed - which lead to other examples and soon became a trail that would be obviously way to time consuming for me to follow - was a keyword stuffed url with a hidden frame that had stuffed text replete with stuffed comment tags. What is shown in the browser was the primary client URL. Poormans cloaking. The primary client site AND the hidden framed site are (at last viewing) listed in Yahoo on the same page not to far from each other. Either the editor of that cat is not very familiar with the other sites in there or this was a bait and switch (logical theory).

I'm talking Exact duplication here - it's the original site hidden from bots by a frame set - you click both urls and see Exactly the same thing.

You be the judge, this is just my observation.

"if they doorways in the traditional sense" should be
"they are not doorways in the traditional sense"...

truckxpression, I doubt you are sincere in your original post based on what Janet has digged around to find - perhaps a common proxy server or something odd - but I doubt the coincidence as well if her facts are straight.

But a quick question to consider for you and others if you are sincere ... if Yahoo directory listings are such guess work for you, why do you rank well (many rankings from your current listing coming up in the top 3-5 positions) within Yahoo for keyword terms targeted in your current Yahoo directory listing desscription. You say guesswork? Based on what I see you have some clue about including your keywords within your Yahoo description. A free tip ... include your targeted keyword in your title if possible and you will even do better.

By arguing about this company's spammy (or not) creations, you are helping this guy further spam and self promote on your own board. I have to admit he is good, as he even has you guys going along with it - 95 posts and counting... is there a record for a spammer's achievements posting to this board?

Janet, as someone you have previously accused of self-promotion (I still feel unfairly by the way since you chose not to respond to my email), I find it hard to believe you are willing to let this continue?

You posted you have evidence of spam regarding truckxpressions creation of this thread, yet with others (in my case I merely dropped a link to my site of resources that was requested within the main topic question) you react much quicker and harshly. This is all bogus to those you have judged unfairly!

quote:

---

Janet, as someone you have previously accused of self-promotion (I still feel unfairly by the way since you chose not to respond to my email),

---

Logan, email me again. Put your nick in the subject. I don't think I choose to not respond. Your email may be filtered out, I will look in the filtered file for it. It also could be that I intended to respond...and got distracted. I have a really bad habit of juggling too many balls, sometimes I drop one and am so busy with the other ones that I do not even notice. Between my family, my kids school, my Girl Scout's, my dog (we train and give live demonstrations) and all of the online stuff I sometimes miss an email or two. Nothing personal.

Why NY? I gave it the benefit of the doubt at first. Yes, I am aware it was a set-up now, but it doesn't matter. I can really get into things...I like puzzles and logic games. Right now I am working on this guys name. I think I have it, but not 100% sure. I will work on it some more tomorrow, I need to get to other things today.

Although some ISPs assign dynamic IP numbers (and therefore the chances of two people sharing the same IP address increase).