__/ [mark | r] on Wednesday 09 November 2005 10:58 \__
> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> __/ [Andrew S.] on Wednesday 09 November 2005 05:28 \__
>> > Is there any places that a site should not be submitted to that would
>> > it's search placement?
>> > Thanks
>> Keep away from sites that link (to) you with sites that are illicit or
>> sex, pills and the like. That is pretty much everything you should know as
>> far as placement is concerned. Irrelevant placements will have no impact,
>> e.g. a portal on gardening linking to a computer shop.
>> Also avoid code that is embedded in your site and transparently indicates
>> link exchanges programs.
> what do you mean by the last bit?
creates links from a pool of related sites and indicates a 'sythetic' link
exchange (server-side would be hard to detect reliably). There are all kinds
of programs that are mucking the algorithms and ruin the indices, so sites
which participate can be penalised. Fear and threat end corruption.
Don't worry, Mark, you haven't been penalised. Jagger is still incomplete in
the sense that many datacentres do not reflect on the changes. "Fret not, be
patient" should be your motto. Give it at least another week.
Roy S. Schestowitz | Have you hugged your penguin today?
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
11:15am up 6 days 7:13, 4 users, load average: 0.48, 0.57, 0.53
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms