bhartzer

FAQ Schema isn't supported by Google Anymore. Hasn't for a while now. Meta description tags are read up to 300 characters... there's quite a bit of issues here that are outdated. But overall it's a decent overview.

Are you 100 percent certain that the domain name wasn't registered before and then got on the blacklist because of prior misuse?

It's quite possible that the domain you chose was registered previously and dropped because the previous owner misused it and burned that domain. The .ONLINE extension has been around for several years now.

https://www.billhartzer.com - personal blog where I've been writing/posting for over 20 years. Tell me about your project/site/app/service and I'll write about it. Always looking for article ideas.

https://www.hartzerdomains.com - personal list of domain names I own, in case someone needs a domain name for a project.

I also am old enough to remember when their motto was "Don't be evil."

I read this as: ads have been great, and have helped to pay all content creators (even the small creators). But now, Answer Engines need certain content that's missing: and it's the largest content creators that are making deals with the Answer Engines.

What CF didn't address is how the smallest content creators are going to be "making deals" with the Answer Engines. They aren't.

One of my degrees in college was in Technical Writing, back in the early 1990s. I've always used em dashes when writing--it only make sense in many cases. And I still use them regularly, just typing two hyphens, one after the other.

Classic SERP sculpting in action. Bury the bad with a flood of the old — and watch Google prioritize what’s “fresh” by post date, not relevance. Neil Patel may be under fire from FTX for $55M in alleged marketing vaporware, but it looks like the real campaign was reputation laundering by content saturation. SEO rule #1: If you can’t clean it up, outrank it.

This suggests the attackers used a double extortion strategy: not only locking files with encryption but also stealing sensitive data to pressure victims into paying a ransom.

I graduated college in the early 1990s and minored in technical writing. I started the first "Student Society of STC" back in college, and that lead to some good internships and a few jobs. Wrote software manuals and online help for an email software company that ran on the AS/400 and MVS. Had to write and code it in SGML, then that eventually moved to HTML.

In my daily work today, I still rely on all those basic principles of technical writing.

As a "long timer" so to speak, I think eventually there ended up being a decline of pure "technical writer" jobs out there, and not too many people going into the profession.

This is great for the 100+ domains that I've registered but never had time yet to fully develop. Going to build landing pages for those domains.

I don't think this has anything to do with Google's OAuth. This issue is literally with every single expired domain name out there. All one has to do is register the expired domain and look at all the emails sent to that domain.

Granted, Google "could" do something, but I don't think it's Google's responsibility to police expired domain names. What am I missing here?

Google should have done this 5-10 years ago.

This happens fairly often. But honestly it's a bit ridiculous that Google suggests that you change from a .co.uk to a .com to resolve the issue. That is NOT an option unless they're going to pay for the domain and the domain migration.

I would keep pushing back on that, there is no way that you need to move to another TLD.

They say that the site is "compromised and has malicious software", I bet it's actually something else, like a site that you're linking out to that's compromised and malicious--that's happened quite a bit in cases where sites are flagged like this in Google Ads.

Android should almost definitely be split off as a separate company.

I could see Android and Chrome as a combined company.

The domains are blocked at the registry level, not the registrar level.

GlobalBlock is owned by GoDaddy, and pretty much covers the TLDs/extensions that are owned by GoDaddy Registry.

NameBlock is a separate company than GlobalBlock, and covers a different set of TLDs/extensions.

Yes, they could place a domain block on "crowdstrike", and variations of that would be blocked, such as cr0wdstrike, crowdstr1ke, etc.

You're thinking of some other service, not NameBlock or GlobalBlock. There's no automated purchasing of all similar domain names. You don't pay registration fees, as the domains that end up being blocked will never be registered by anyone (not even you).

There literally is a block on the variations, it works at the Registry level not the registrar level.

If you place a block on a brand/companyname (a string of characters), then no one can register a domain name that contains those strings of characters. They also block up to 500 variations (placing a block on 'paypal' would get 'paypa1' blocked as well.

Those domains that are blocked won't be 'parked', someone trying to register the domain that's blocked, it will just say it's not available for registration.

What I don't understand is why companies and brands like this just don't use NameBlock or a similar domain blocking service like GlobalBlock.

They literally can block domain names that have their company name or brand in them from being registered (up to 500 variations of their domain).

It's literally like $99/year to place a block. Saves a lot of the hassle of having to deal with parody and phishing sites and trying to take them down.

Just block the domain(s) from being registered in the first place.

This is very similar to Majestic's Link Graph where you can put in any domain name and see all the links, up to tier 5, that link to that domain name.

I'm wearing a Series 9 right now. What are the chances that they have to 'turn off' or 'disable' the pulse oximetry function?

I haven't heard that mentioned--or if it was I missed it.

You can actually get a manual action (penalty) from Google if you do IP cloaking/redirects. It's still mentioned prominently in Google's Webmaster Guidelines: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175?hl=en#z...

That 'policy' is still actually in effect, I believe, in Google's webmaster guidelines. They just don't enforce it.

Years ago (early 2000s) Google used to mostly crawl using Google-owned IPs, but they'd occasionally use Comcast or some other ISPs (partners) to crawl. If you were IP cloaking, you'd have to look out for those pesky non-Google IPs. I know, as I used to play that IP cloaking game back in the early 2000s, mostly using scripts from a service called "IP Delivery".

Google actually shut that down pretty quick. That 'loophole' doesn't exist anymore.

Pro Tip: if you're going to boast on how you're spamming Google, then expect it to be shut down, especially if it's a hole in their algorithm.

I get what you're saying, it's weird to interview him as a Google employee. But actually it would be really weird if they didn't include Danny Sullivan in the article in some capacity. Danny Sullivan, over the years, has been so influential and such an influential voice when it comes to Search and SEO. He previously was on the other side, not working for Google.

I own the domain of my last name. Several family members use (firstname@lastname.com).

I once went to get a new phone at Best Buy, and the employee needed my email address. I gave it to here (firstname@lastname.com) and she insisted that it was NOT my email address. She insisted that it MUST end in @gmail.com or @yahoo.com, something like that.

We frequently sign up for stuff online, and when we enter our email address it won't let us sign up... we figured it is because the email address is too similar to our actual name, the name we've entered in the 'first name' and 'last name' fields (it happens to both me and my wife at least 2-3 times a year).

I agree, now that you pointed it out, there probably isn't a legal leg to stand on. IANAL, though--would be interested in hearing from an attorney about that.

Regardless, if you can prove you're the website owner, then Internet Archive will remove all of your content and stop archiving your site if you ask them.

I know websites (and some of my clients) who are actually actively REMOVING copies of their website from the Internet Archive.

There's a specific process for getting all of the content removed, and asking them to not archive the website.

For some ecommerce websites, they're removing copies from Internet Archive because there's pricing data that's getting archived.

I've also had clients remove copies because they've had a big problem with scrapers who are scraping the copies of the site in Internet Archive. They've been able to (mostly) stop scrapers on the site, but having archived copies of the site allows scrapers to scrape the Internet Archive.

Just fyi, the database that is used for the site:domain.com is actually not the same database that they use for live searches.

So you may see a certain number of pages using the site: command but not or less pages may be indexed.

If you want pages indexed, out then in an xml sitemap file, make sure there are internal links to them on your site, and external links from other sites really helps. Third party indexer tools help as well.