Re: Google Site: Banned versus Google Link: Banned

"Stacey" <remove-the-y-stacey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Censorship??? LOL, Google doesn't have to index any site it
deems not worthy.

Heya Stacey,

Yep. Exactly. They are the judge, the jury and the executioner.
One way is to ban the site:. Another way is to ban the link:. I'm
seeing Google link: banned http://www.aquaticcreationsnc.com/.
Maybe they'll correct these problems, maybe they're testing
some things out. It's all a secret, and those that have something
to hide cannot be trusted. I on the other hand, have nothing to
hide. I came clean here and with Google. ;-)

They ARE the judge. They ARE the jury. And they execute in
"unknown" ways, much the way the United States government
operates. They conceive "execution secrets". I perceive the
same. They hide. I tell it like it is (although I tend to put a spin
on things sometimes that might escape me).

The government leans and ALL fall into the fear and compliance
mode.

It is their RIGHT, not your right, to be published!

Police departments have raised similar arguments in the past.
I ran into that many times with the Sheriff's office, with various
police officers that didn't like a young kid with long hair, and
with other caucasian police officers that didn't like caucasian
people befriending African Americans.

Others, may be losing out in Google and there can be a
reason. Google HAS always not kept sites listed long with
low PR and not enough links.

Your arguing against something that doesn't exist. I'm telling
you, that Google now applies a link: ban as well as a site: ban.
http://www.aquaticcreationsnc.com/ which builds and designs
custom swimming pools, spas and water features, including
caverns, waterfalls and bubble jets, is link: banned. It wasn't
that way two weeks ago. Don't trust me. I'm hoping others
either confirm this or offer other opinions on it. I don't need
your trust, I'm just telling you how I'm perceiving it (my spin),
which may or may not be 100% accurate.

Can I get something objective out of you? Tell me what you
think of the colors at the following link?
http://www.aquaticcreationsnc.com/jc/images/google/banned/

Your site isn't important to Google.

You can't say that with any respect. That argument is a complete
fallacy. That statement is 100% your opinion, IMHO. If Google
truly thought that way, they wouldn't be in business. Speak for
yourself.

Your PR is to low.

Yes, the PR is very low. The PR for the links won't go up either
if there's a link: ban. And that's exactly where the website sits
within Google, http://www.aquaticcreationsnc.com/. Google
won't follow any of the links here, why? The information here
is truthful and honest and in no way wrong about anything.

The answer lies in the fact that they've implemented a link: ban.
There any lawyers around that want to help out with a case
against Google?

You have done dodgy techniques in the past and was penalized.
You have not gained enough trust yet.

Google is run by people. Who controls Google? George Walker
"Chimp" Bush and William Jefferson "Mouthy Monica" Clinton?
But all in all, Google is programmed and knows nothing of trust.

Trust is a human emotion. People that fear truth might display
trust. A machine, though, knows nothing of trust, and thus has
no fear either.

Honest people that know the truth, fear not telling the truth and
perform honestly. Organizations that fear the truth have some-
thing to hide. Secrecy represents the position of those that hold
something to hide.

I stand by my assertion that a link: ban currently operates through
Google. I know this as a fact.

For instance, if you'd like to test it out, set up a link on a page that
you run that changes often. You can delete the link in a few days
after you've convinced yourself that a link: ban does exist. Post
a link to the page in the newsgroup here. Link to Aquatic Creations.
Prove me wrong if you can. I (think I) "know" what I see.

Thanks for posting your arguments. <g>

Jim Carlock
Post replies to the group.
--
North Carolina Swimming Pool And Spa Builder
http://www.aquaticcreationsnc.com/


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DDT Ban myth still not quite dead.
    ... "mistake" and rescinded the ban but not before 20million kids ... Aaaah, Adam, you should sharpen your Google skills, try "ddt ban who", ... Not the best cite but good enough, when the US stops production of DDT the ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
  • Re: Banning pages from google, yahoo etc. - how???
    ... > How is it possible for someone to ban a web page, so that it is no longer ... > I know that Google sometimes bans pages related to nazism, white supremacy, ... > Google bans websites selling Nazi memorabilia from its German results, ... > Then there's Google updates. ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Google sued
    ... risk the exclusion of a few legitimate web sites or to ban a web site once ... The problem Google has is that if it catches a big well-known company, ... go instead searching for it to other engines. ... and if you took all the spam sites ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Google Site: Banned versus Google Link: Banned
    ... Jim Carlock wrote: ... Google employs at least two different types of bans. ... ban I first noticed in March of 2006. ... As for the alleged link:yoursite.com ban, I would venture to say that ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Google "Secure Access" FAQ + Download link
    ... in that they will not do business with anyone they even suspect is ... I tend to trust everyone and treat them ... Google qualifies. ... Most ISP's generate statistics on their overall customers traffic ...
    (alt.internet.wireless)