__/ [www.1-script.com] on Monday 29 August 2005 20:13 \__
> Hello everyone.
> Here is where the idea came from:
> The guy is simply making notes at the last SES conference in San Jose, and
> that's his blog.
> (on a side note: I'm planning to attend the NYC one on
> 02/27-2006-03/02/2006 but I doubt it will be so Google-centric as the San
> Jose one for obvious geographical reasons ;)
> Anyways, the idea was kind of casually tossed that sites with
> non-permanent links will be penalized because the sites are either
> allowing errors or spamming links, and both aren't good. Anyways, I can
> hardly imagine a site on which ALL links are static (apparently non of the
> news sites will qualify). And, since I'm also rotating links to my own
> sites, I'm trying to figure out how to deal with this change (which may or
> may not have come already).
> So, if there is more info on the subject available in this respectable
> group, please post it here.
Having read what the others had to say, I'd moderate my speculation from the
last message and say that SE's face an impossible task if they penalise for
so-called 'dynamic' links. Don't forget that sites like the CNN change
their _entire_ text content all the time _as well as_ links (blogs
likewise). Perhaps Google can detect static pages where only the links
(simplified) Page 1
News have come from the <a href="http://example.org">wonderful poker
News have come from the <a href="http://example.com/blog/">wonderful poker
Diff Page-1 Page-2 gives:
Which indicates that something fishy is going on.
Roy S. Schestowitz Useless fact: Women blink twice as much as men