Many thanks for the help. Please read my answers to some questions
below. Once again, I am unaware about the proper etiquette here, and am
confused where I should write. But I have tried to write in between the
comments from y'all.
Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [GlobeTrekker] on Sunday 12 February 2006 06:34 \__
> > All right. Here are additional details to this problem:
> > I managed to get in touch with a human via phone in Google's office in
> > US. I spoke to a lady, who actually was a receptionist, and she
> > listened to my problem and details with great patience and was very
> > kind.
> That's re-assuring to hear. Did she give you an E-mail address to one of the
> technical details? I hear that they occasionally do this.
No, she gave me an email address that she could access. She then
promised me that after she received my email, she would forward it to
"help desk" (whatever that means as far as Google is concerned).
> > She then suggested I resend my email (regarding the original complain
> > of why my site was banned), to another internal google email she gave
> > me (No, I won't disclose that email here, yet).
> Ah, okay. Just as I suspected.
> > Well, I did resend the complain and all correspondence that has taken
> > place so far. That was like one week ago. Nothing. No reply, no
> > response, etc.
> Ah, okay. Just as I suspected.
> > Now, I read one of the recent comments here that if there is some
> > problem with my site (which I am unaware of - as in 302 redirects,
> > etc.) and if I resubmit - reinclusion - then I am committing suicide,
> > as in Google wouldn't give me another chance (BTW, I have already
> > resubmitted my site to Google via their submit site form).
> That's meaningless. Think of it as a game which involves hitting a button and
> maybe copying a number for the CAPTCHA test.
> If you try a reinclusion request, you might get a second chance. They do
> contact the Webmasters after some nagging. Don't be reluctant to re-send a
> message every now and then because it appears to make a difference, as in
> most circumstances in life where a business is involved.
All right. So I believe you are suggesting that I keep resending
replies to the auto-case number email they have sent me. I will do
> > Therefore, I sincerely request if you could take a look at the
> > concerned site and see if I am (unknowingly) breaking any rules? So far
> > I have checked using CopyScape, etc. And I have also checked keywords,
> > etc.
> > However, I am not sure about two things:
> > 1. My site can be accessed via multiple addresses (even though the
> > actual site/blog is hosted on Typepad. Here are the different
> > addresses:
> > http://www.see lai.com (CNAME redirect via register.com to the blog
> > address below)
> > http://see lai.blogs.com
> > http://see lai.com (A Address redirect to an IP address at Register.com
> > that redirects somewhere to my site with a register.com sponsored
> > advertisement at the bottom of the screen).
> > http://www.see lai.com/blog (the extra extension - blog - is added by
> > Typepad, as Typepad wants the user to name the blog, and in my case I
> > called my blog, well, "blog")
> My screen is being grabbed and made public periodically, so I can't offer any
> help here. Otherwise, I probably would have.
Can anyone else help with the above? Many thanks in advance.
> > 2. Some posts on my site are archived in multiple categories. For
> > example, the same story could be in say Category A, B, C, etc. And then
> > these stories are part of individual archive pages.
> That's fine. It's beyond acceptable because many publishing tools work in
> that way.
> > Well, that's about it. I am not sure if the above (either option)
> > creates a scenario where I am penalized for duplicate content, etc.
> > Otherwise, I have checked to the best of my knowledge that I am using
> > no spam techniques, no hidden text, etc. , and no tricks to boost my
> > site-rank.
> I believe you. Attempt a reinclusion. The only thing going against you is the
> nature of the site, which might make the engineers or reviewers less
> inclined to cut some slack.
Now this is the most puzzling factor. If you have visited the (my)
above sites, you will see that I have clear warnings on each and every
page/photo. All right, the nature of the site, is a bit odd.
But how come I still see same models (and women) on other sites (the
pictures are public domain) that don't even have a warning or what have
you? And they are still indexed and doing OK with Google, but only the
above site is banned. Please note I am not lifting pictures from other
sites, but receiving them via valid sources who simply want to promote.
So copyright is not an issue. Besides, as I mentioned, the pictures are
in public domain.
Therefore, I am a bit lost with the fact that I could be banned for the
nature of the site. Unless, of course, one of my rival or competitor
booked me in with Google. I know some people were pissed that I got
120,000 page views per day for almost two years. Is it possible that
someone just complained and try to get me out? As in revenge or
If so, how do I reason with Google that I am being treated unfair?
> > Many thanks for your advice and or suggestion in advance. I have been
> > sitting tight for three weeks and things seem to get nowhere.
> Three weeks is not that long, relatively. Don't sit tight. Relax, unwind and
> rest assured that if your site does not spam, all will eventually revert to
> the old state.
> > One more thing. If I search Google via "site:..." command, I get
> > nothing for "site:www.see lai.com"
> This means banishment. When you file a reinclusion request, that's the first
> thing they check. It's an indicator of whether the algorithm has
> automatically excluded you.
> > However, if I search Google using "site:see lai.blogs.com" I do get at
> > least 9 or sometimes 23 results from 2003! All pages indexed there are
> > like two and a half years go! Though the latest cached page by Google
> > for that result is Feb 5, 2006. What gives?
> I'd call that an oddity, or datacentre misalignment, or out-of-date cache.
> The above test supersedes the latter.
I don't seem to understand this part. Can someone explain in details?
> > Once again, many thanks in advance.
> > Cheers!
> > Ron
> > Google ate my site! And I am sitting tight!
> It could be worse, mate. The authorities sometimes ban sites based on IP
> addresses. All you miss is the referral-based traffic with Google. Your site
> is both alive and accessible, still.
> Good luck (and remember to relax!),
Yes, I miss traffic from Google. Yahoo and MSN now give me good enough
traffic. But after two years plus of hard work, and since it was just a
hobby and not a revenue based site, etc. I feel cheated and/or treated
The site isn't just about models, etc. If you read the archives, there
are hundreds of posts on how to do business in China, culture, etc. of
this region, etc.
Model pictures were the easy part. The posts on topics above really
took a lot of time and thought in informing foreigners what they could
expect should they come to this area as managers or entrepreneurs.
> Roy S. Schestowitz | Useful fact: close elevator button = Express Mode
> http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
> 6:45am up 26 days 2:01, 32 users, load average: 0.24, 0.40, 0.47
> http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
Many thanks for your help.