I think the primary motivation for Google is to keep the index usable to the majority of people by serving the results that best serve people searching Google (in turn making advertising more profitable). However a technical imperative also exists - the index, even by Google's standards, is too big. Reducing the footprint of the web in the Google index is worth millions and millions of dollars in savings for Google as they have to spend less on infrastructure than they would indexing the ever growing problem of web spam.

Reducing web spam is a good thing. The better Google get at it the less we'll all have to deal with the web spam scourge which is devaluing the web as a whole.

It's always going to be a case of cat and mouse. Each time Google plugs a hole it seems someone works out a new way of gaming the system.

I'm curious, what does that site fail to deliver to the surfer looking for ella milano?

It lacks full-length videos.

I don't think there's anything wrong with Medium Pimpin's sites.

They look a lot better than many blogs that have much more text. I think it's quite a nice user experience.

It delivers the absolute bare minimum which is what many surfers have unfortunately come to expect and what many webmasters have conditioned themselves to deliver. Nothing more, nothing less. That's a problem. The concept of scaling when applied to the building out of blog networks is so out of whack. It's crazy.

"Have a shitty site that makes you $5 per month? Fabulous!
Make 2,000 more of those bad boys, rinse, repeat, and baller status will be yours for the taking!
All you have to do is make a massive amount of shitty little sites!
Critical mass be damned! Good taste be damned!"

Wow. The bar really is that low, innit?

Having a small number of "quality" sites does not make you immune from Google penalties.

I wouldn't say it's the bare minimum, there is actually content there, and enough of it to knock one out to. Nothing wrong with that biz model, and I've done very well out of giving away far less until recently. Enough content to give the surfer a good idea of what he is going to get if he signs up, not too much that you need mad traffic numbers to offset all the satisfied wanks completed. Surfer is looking for content of the model, gets exactly that - where's the problem?

As for the good taste - where does that come into aff marketing from a business POV? Until the need to adapt or die arises, as it obviously has done very recently, of course you give surfers the bare minimum, or, at least, not the whole shebang.

http://i.imgur.com/O2kOy.png

lol. That's some really funny shit.

My goal has always been to make the surfer WANT to sign up whereas it seems as if you're strategy is to make the surfer feel as if he has to sign up.

Panda does effect some businesses and others not at all. Depends on what end of the spectrum you reside.

http://exgfshomevids.com/wp-content/...bsdro1_400.gif

lol ok :thumbsup

I really don't know, what is goin on and what I am doing wrong, you are all full of some theories, and shit. My sites are going down with every update. I don't change antyhing, just one day wake up with switch off and almost no traffic, and it was rising until that day. All handwritten blogs.

If your blogs look like your sig ... you are out of luck!
Stuff like that is exactly what G is aiming at: Big Footprints.

so ,come on,give some advice

Google are important and they know it, but acting like they own the Internet bothers me.

Sending fucking warning letters, seriously? It's on a par with Paul Markham's ignore list for hurt feelings.