wierd google cache

Linkster · 2005-06-27, 03:34 PM

Bill - I dont read her stuff anymore as its usually prepared for the masses - and usually doesnt reflect the underlying stuff that sher really knows

I saw the patent - and I believe that they have a part of the algorithm that does age-justify domains that are expired, had a previous listing on DMOZ and might have previous backlinks. As a matter of fact I believe they have stated that they do place a zeroing effect on those type of domains the best they can - and will do a better job of it once they have their full registrar system running (they were approved as a registrar recently)

As far as a sandbox - no I dont believe there is one - and can actually prove that there isnt as if there was it would have to follow certain mathematical rules - and it would apply to all freshly registered domains - and with domains that have never been registered ever - I can still get them into the top listings with no problem.
Of course with the domains that have been owned before its tougher - but that has more to do with the expired domain penalty - not a sandbox.

Most people that call what they are experiencing a "sandbox" just havent been around long enough or had enough experiences to see other causes - I usually say they havent gotten to the swingset yet

Bill · 2005-06-27, 04:24 PM

Linkster, my opinion of Jil Whalen is similar to yours- that is, most of the stuff in her newsletter and website is just too obvious to be worth reading closely.

But, she's pretty conservative, and not usually wrong when it comes to basic technical stuff, so when she said "Hey, it looks like the new patent implies there is a sandbox after all...", well, I think that opinion is worth considering.

I myself haven't read the patent, and don't really plan to.

The "sandbox", if it exists or not, has never affected my bottom line. When I buy a domain my first step with it is to set up some basic themed content on it, and let it sit for a year to collect some age.

So, if there ever was a sandbox I would never know about it. I can't say I've ever seen it, don't have direct experience with it, and I've never measured it.

So I've been a "sandbox agnostic" - I don't care wether or not it might exist.

But here's what she says about it - it certainly sounds like she believes it exists:

"I wasn't surprised about the stuff in the patent that corresponded with Google's aging delay and its "sandbox" as I had already seen a lot of discussion on this. For those who aren't familiar with the aging delay and the sandbox, you'll want to note that there is a lot of disagreement over what causes a site to be thrown in the sandbox.

However, based on my own observations and the experiences of some
trusted SEO friends, it's my belief that the sandbox is basically a purgatory database where Google places certain URLs based on a variety of predetermined criteria. (Much of this is spelled out in the first part of the patent application.)

The aging delay, on the other hand, is actually a subset of the
sandbox. In other words, the aging delay is just *one* reason why a URL might get placed in the sandbox.

Basically, if you have a brand new domain/website, it will
automatically land in the sandbox regardless of anything that you do with it. Your new website will be stuck there for an unspecified period of time (averaging around 9 months these days) and it will not rank highly in Google for any keyword phrases that might bring it any decent traffic. Yes, it can sometimes rank highly for the company name, or the names of the people who run the company. It may also show up in Google for a few additional phrases that other sites are not focusing on within their content. But new domains will not show up in Google's natural results for even slightly competitive keyword phrases until they are removed from the sandbox.

Other reasons why a site might be placed in the sandbox go beyond the aging delay. Google's major algorithm upheavals such as the recent one dubbed "Bourbon" by the folks at WebmasterWorld, show all too clearly that old domains can also be placed in the sandbox, under the right (or in this case wrong) circumstances. Nobody can really say for sure what the criteria is, but Google's patent does give us some insight into what some of them might be."

Jil Whalen from the HighRankings newsletter

DangerDave · 2005-06-27, 06:16 PM

What linkster said...

There is no 'sandbox'.

..and additionally.. IMO any publically purported theory of Google's inner workings is rarely more than the writer wanting to hear their own voice..

DD

Bill · 2005-06-27, 06:42 PM

Now c'mon Dave, that's just an argument by assertion, and it gets canceled out by the growing number of voices in mainstream that seem to be saying the sandbox does exist.

Like I said before, I've been agnostic, and had no opinion about the "sandbox".

But I've been reading around a bit, and Jil Whalen isn't the only mainstreamer that seems to be saying "Okay, the sandbox does exist...".

I don't care if it exists or not. But if you are going to say it don't exist, you should also say _why_ you think it don't exist.

2005-06-27, 03:34 PM	#1
Linkster NO! Im not a female - but being a dragon, I do eat them. Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Sex Delta Posts: 5,084	Bill - I dont read her stuff anymore as its usually prepared for the masses - and usually doesnt reflect the underlying stuff that sher really knows I saw the patent - and I believe that they have a part of the algorithm that does age-justify domains that are expired, had a previous listing on DMOZ and might have previous backlinks. As a matter of fact I believe they have stated that they do place a zeroing effect on those type of domains the best they can - and will do a better job of it once they have their full registrar system running (they were approved as a registrar recently) As far as a sandbox - no I dont believe there is one - and can actually prove that there isnt as if there was it would have to follow certain mathematical rules - and it would apply to all freshly registered domains - and with domains that have never been registered ever - I can still get them into the top listings with no problem. Of course with the domains that have been owned before its tougher - but that has more to do with the expired domain penalty - not a sandbox. Most people that call what they are experiencing a "sandbox" just havent been around long enough or had enough experiences to see other causes - I usually say they havent gotten to the swingset yet __________________ Pussy Chompers Porn Links NSCash

2005-06-27, 06:16 PM	#3
DangerDave Bonged Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: BrisVegas, AUSTRALIA Posts: 4,882	What linkster said... There is no 'sandbox'. ..and additionally.. IMO any publically purported theory of Google's inner workings is rarely more than the writer wanting to hear their own voice.. DD __________________ Old Dollars >>>> Now with over 90 Hosted Free Sites <<<< DangerDave.com.au - Adult Links to Free Porn

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

2005-06-27, 04:24 PM	#2
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	Linkster, my opinion of Jil Whalen is similar to yours- that is, most of the stuff in her newsletter and website is just too obvious to be worth reading closely. But, she's pretty conservative, and not usually wrong when it comes to basic technical stuff, so when she said "Hey, it looks like the new patent implies there is a sandbox after all...", well, I think that opinion is worth considering. I myself haven't read the patent, and don't really plan to. The "sandbox", if it exists or not, has never affected my bottom line. When I buy a domain my first step with it is to set up some basic themed content on it, and let it sit for a year to collect some age. So, if there ever was a sandbox I would never know about it. I can't say I've ever seen it, don't have direct experience with it, and I've never measured it. So I've been a "sandbox agnostic" - I don't care wether or not it might exist. But here's what she says about it - it certainly sounds like she believes it exists: "I wasn't surprised about the stuff in the patent that corresponded with Google's aging delay and its "sandbox" as I had already seen a lot of discussion on this. For those who aren't familiar with the aging delay and the sandbox, you'll want to note that there is a lot of disagreement over what causes a site to be thrown in the sandbox. However, based on my own observations and the experiences of some trusted SEO friends, it's my belief that the sandbox is basically a purgatory database where Google places certain URLs based on a variety of predetermined criteria. (Much of this is spelled out in the first part of the patent application.) The aging delay, on the other hand, is actually a subset of the sandbox. In other words, the aging delay is just one reason why a URL might get placed in the sandbox. Basically, if you have a brand new domain/website, it will automatically land in the sandbox regardless of anything that you do with it. Your new website will be stuck there for an unspecified period of time (averaging around 9 months these days) and it will not rank highly in Google for any keyword phrases that might bring it any decent traffic. Yes, it can sometimes rank highly for the company name, or the names of the people who run the company. It may also show up in Google for a few additional phrases that other sites are not focusing on within their content. But new domains will not show up in Google's natural results for even slightly competitive keyword phrases until they are removed from the sandbox. Other reasons why a site might be placed in the sandbox go beyond the aging delay. Google's major algorithm upheavals such as the recent one dubbed "Bourbon" by the folks at WebmasterWorld, show all too clearly that old domains can also be placed in the sandbox, under the right (or in this case wrong) circumstances. Nobody can really say for sure what the criteria is, but Google's patent does give us some insight into what some of them might be." Jil Whalen from the HighRankings newsletter

2005-06-27, 06:42 PM	#4
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	Now c'mon Dave, that's just an argument by assertion, and it gets canceled out by the growing number of voices in mainstream that seem to be saying the sandbox does exist. Like I said before, I've been agnostic, and had no opinion about the "sandbox". But I've been reading around a bit, and Jil Whalen isn't the only mainstreamer that seems to be saying "Okay, the sandbox does exist...". I don't care if it exists or not. But if you are going to say it don't exist, you should also say _why_ you think it don't exist.