Comments on: Who said it’s duplicate content? Google didn’t …

By: Contempt

Contempt — Thu, 14 May 2009 01:36:28 +0000

Don’t worry about anything but results, is it getting traffic or not? PR is nothing but a number.

By: Bertus

Bertus — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:03:55 +0000

I also post some duplicate content on my sites, but I’ve got some original content as well. Im still at PR 0, how many pages/links should I have to get to PR1? If I just get a lot of duplicate content, would my PR go higher or lower? My website is at http://hellosixpackabs.com if you guys could help a brother out with some advice. Thanks.

By: xentech

xentech — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:30:14 +0000

@monty, PR is nothing to do with duplicate content

By: Does Google compare markup? - Affiliate Marketing

Does Google compare markup? - Affiliate Marketing — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:24:51 +0000

[...] Originally Posted by ContentBoss I’m interested In your ideas. You seem to be suggesting that a web spider (googlebot) which does little more than grab pages from servers can in some way tell how popular a particular page is with human beings. How do you think that works then? Are you suggesting that the googlebot is in some way hooked into the stats packages of the servers it interrogates? Or uses some kind of funky heuristic to determine from response times what the server load is and therefore how ‘popular it is with human beings’? Or did you mean something else? I’ve came across discussions of google take into account bounce rates: Search for your keyword, you visit the first result, it isn’t relevant to your keyword so you leave back to your search, go to the next result has relevant content so you stay there longer. Back to OP: There is a sort of relevant blog post here Who said it’s duplicate content? Google didn’t … | Contempt [...]

By: sgtryan

sgtryan — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:06:20 +0000

I agree.. great post. People look to Google as this ub3r l33t algorithm that can ub3r detect any time of spam.. so very untrue. Google just detects the obvious and the rest, well, that’s the beauty of SHPAM. w00t.

By: Contempt

Contempt — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 19:54:32 +0000

HELO PERMAHZ. I LIEK TEH MULTI QUESTION ASKZ TOO.

Usually I do the full URL.

By: Perma

Perma — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:12:53 +0000

Awesome post. When linking back to the original author, do you think it’s enough to link back to the originating domain/subdomain or must the original article be linked?

By: Perma

Perma — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:56:41 +0000

Now, I’m wondering, can the linkback be to the originating domain/subdomain to be ok? Or does it have to be the specific page?

By: Perma

Perma — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:47:19 +0000

Awesome post. Thanks

By: Shark SEO

Shark SEO — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:52:15 +0000

Agreed – Google’s in this position where it’s not able to auto-penalise folks that republish content because this is basically all that news sites do. Until they figure out a way to sort that (and I don’t think they ever will), we get to make hay while the sun shines.