___/ On Wednesday 24 August 2005 18:30, [Big Bill] wrote : \___
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 13:42:19 GMT, info_at_1-script_dot_com@xxxxxxx
> (www.1-script.com) wrote:
>>> Anyone noticing big changes in traffic?
>>> I have a site that covers numerous products and
>>> themes, it's been averaging around 5,000 to 5,500
>>> uniques a day for the past month, but over the last
>>> 3 days it's been getting 7,000 to 7,500
>>> It doesn't seem to be just one section, the traffic seems
>>> to be across the board.
>>Well, lucky you!
>>In my case the site actually got some boost at the time of the 'bourbon'
>>update, but that (supposedly minor) update last Saturday (08/20/05) killed
>>40% of the traffic overnight. Man, that sucks!
>>I guess, the changes Google guys talked about at SES conference few days
>>ago are already in effect: sites with non-premanent (rotating) outbound
>>links will suffer considerable penalties (considered links spam,
>>basically) AND, as a cherry on top, sites that change IP address will be
>>completely re-valued. So, I got worst of both changes: I recently moved
>>the site AND I did rotate links to my other sites :-(
> Rotating links? I'm not familiar with the term.
Matt < http://photomatt.net/ > uses them (see timely dozen) and he doesn't
appear to be penalised.
Roy S. Schestowitz "Turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie"