vb.org Archive
Page 4 of 9 « First 23 4 56 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vb.org Archive (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/index.php)
-   vBulletin 3.8 Add-ons (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=235)
-   -   Board Optimization - KX - Spider Permissions (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showthread.php?t=196420)

ShawneyJ 12-07-2008 11:37 AM
wow this looks sweet, its like what IP.Boards have right? put the spiders in there own group.
and alow only the spider that are in spider display in admin panel. as for vbulletin, the spiders allowed would be vbulletin spider list.xml right? i think thats what your saying above ;)
this would be good to get members to sign up to view the thread they found on google that the bots can only see. nice job ;)

eJM 12-07-2008 04:56 PM
It is a violation of Google's rules. They may consider this "cloaking." One of the definitions of cloaking is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Google
Serving different content to search engines than to users.
It's likely that putting a spider in a special position to see content that is not available to unregistered users would be considered cloaking ind it will get your website removed from the Google indexed pages.

Jim

Ziki 12-07-2008 06:33 PM
Well but users can see the content that the spiders can as well.Let's say you disabled guest viewing of your threads,but registered still can see.So spiders can actually see,what users can as well.

eJM 12-07-2008 07:08 PM
That's not the same. If you have to devise special code, whether that be template edits or a plug-in, you are giving the spiders an advantage website visitors do not have. If the content is blocked from view until a user meets certain requirements, like registering, agreeing to terms and being added to a special usergroup, then you are causing the spiders to circumvent these requirements, which the normal user cannot do.

If the possibility exists for a user of this modification to be banned or penalized by Google or another popular search engine, you should state it in the modification description. If you have proof that search engines will not punish users of this mod, then there isn't a problem. It's my opinion that you have an ethical responsibility to your customers (a customer isn't always someone who pays a fee) to keep them informed of any possible consequences from using this software.

Jim

Ziki 12-08-2008 03:36 AM
Ok Sir.

ShawneyJ 12-08-2008 10:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eJM (Post 1680457)
That's not the same. If you have to devise special code, whether that be template edits or a plug-in, you are giving the spiders an advantage website visitors do not have. If the content is blocked from view until a user meets certain requirements, like registering, agreeing to terms and being added to a special usergroup, then you are causing the spiders to circumvent these requirements, which the normal user cannot do.

If the possibility exists for a user of this modification to be banned or penalized by Google or another popular search engine, you should state it in the modification description. If you have proof that search engines will not punish users of this mod, then there isn't a problem. It's my opinion that you have an ethical responsibility to your customers (a customer isn't always someone who pays a fee) to keep them informed of any possible consequences from using this software.

Jim


well if IP.Boards are allowed to do it the last few years, then so can we yeah? it comes standard with IP.Boards, its bloody built in m8...get banned from google. you mean black listed? i'd doubt that to. its all about the guests, what users can see bots can see, also i see no IP.Boards black listed. copy and paste where its says on google about "guests" or send me a link. ""Guests"". no offense but send some proof on this page, as what you told Ziki to add is going to scare everyone off from using this addon completely.
yeah agreed, be safe, but bring on the proof first.
also hows the bots going to no what guests can see or cant see?
sorry but this is just the same as what comes standard with IP.Boards, if they can use it so can we true? other wise this to me makes no damn sense.

eJM 12-08-2008 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycob (Post 1680851)
well if IP.Boards are allowed to do it the last few years, then so can we yeah?
Congratulations. You have caused Ziki to edit the description back to the way it was, without the disclaimer. I don't use IPBoards, so I wouldn't know if what you say is true or not. I do use Google and the quote I provided above comes from here: http://www.google.com/support/webmas...n&answer=66355 No, it doesn't use the exact term "Guests", but then it doesn't use many other terms that might imply the same thing. It uses "users." Why don't you provide the same sort of "proof?"

Quote:
... what you told Ziki to add is going to scare everyone off from using this addon completely.
yeah agreed, be safe, but bring on the proof first.
Exactly. Where's your proof? Look, this debate could go on and on. If you want to have a debate about what Google and other search engines like and don't like, start a new topic. I merely agreed with at least one other very experienced webmaster that the possibility exists that this mod is in violation of Google terms. The debate rages on and unless we get a definitive answer from Google itself, regarding the practice of allowing it to index content that its users will click the link to and get an error message instead of the content, then neither you nor I will have the "proof."

As I said before, that you apparently didn't read even though you quoted it, it's my opinion that Ziki has an ethical responsibility to his customers to warn them of the possibilities. I've got nothing to gain or lose by keeping people from using this mod. It's only my desire to help my fellow webmasters who may be looking for legitimate ways to bring relevant content, including advertising, to my users. This product does not appear to be that and it may be detrimental to my ranking and indexing in Google and other search engines.

I'm taking a wild guess here that, based on the content of your avatar and signature, you're prob'ly around a teenager. I don't know how much experience you have as a webmaster, but mine goes back to about the time you were born (in other words, in the teens). I'm old and I hope I am wise in some matters. My personal rulZZZ: don't argue with children. I'm done with this conversation.

Ziki 12-08-2008 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eJM (Post 1681035)
Congratulations. You have caused Ziki to edit the description back to the way it was, without the disclaimer. I don't use IPBoards, so I wouldn't know if what you say is true or not. I do use Google and the quote I provided above comes from here: http://www.google.com/support/webmas...n&answer=66355 No, it doesn't use the exact term "Guests", but then it doesn't use many other terms that might imply the same thing. It uses "users." Why don't you provide the same sort of "proof?"


Exactly. Where's your proof? Look, this debate could go on and on. If you want to have a debate about what Google and other search engines like and don't like, start a new topic. I merely agreed with at least one other very experienced webmaster that the possibility exists that this mod is in violation of Google terms. The debate rages on and unless we get a definitive answer from Google itself, regarding the practice of allowing it to index content that its users will click the link to and get an error message instead of the content, then neither you nor I will have the "proof."

As I said before, that you apparently didn't read even though you quoted it, it's my opinion that Ziki has an ethical responsibility to his customers to warn them of the possibilities. I've got nothing to gain or lose by keeping people from using this mod. It's only my desire to help my fellow webmasters who may be looking for legitimate ways to bring relevant content, including advertising, to my users. This product does not appear to be that and it may be detrimental to my ranking and indexing in Google and other search engines.

I'm taking a wild guess here that, based on the content of your avatar and signature, you're prob'ly around a teenager. I don't know how much experience you have as a webmaster, but mine goes back to about the time you were born (in other words, in the teens). I'm old and I hope I am wise in some matters. My personal rulZZZ: don't argue with children. I'm done with this conversation.
I guess it's time I enter into this conversation.My ethical responsibility to warn the users would be if I was sure this modification would negatively affect their website.I am sure that this does not conflict with Google TOS,as spiders can see the same content as the board's users can.

As another point that's off this topic,is that you shouldn't judge someone according to their age.For first it's discrimination and as a second point,you would be surprised how many adults behave childish.

eJM 12-08-2008 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziki (Post 1681178)
I guess it's time I enter into this conversation.My ethical responsibility to warn the users would be if I was sure this modification would negatively affect their website.I am sure that this does not conflict with Google TOS,as spiders can see the same content as the board's users can.
You have the right to choose your own ethical standards. I believe you are wrong about the board's users being able to see the content Google spiders index. If Google indexes a private forum and it appears as a search result for a given term, when the searcher clicks the link, they will receive a "No Permissions" message. You have given Google a view of content that no one else can see unless they meet certain requirements. That could be defined as cloaking, but it is almost certainly subterfuge.

Quote:
As another point that's off this topic,is that you shouldn't judge someone according to their age.For first it's discrimination and as a second point,you would be surprised how many adults behave childish.
I am prejudiced against children. I don't like them. So sue me.

Jim

Ziki 12-09-2008 03:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eJM (Post 1681235)
You have the right to choose your own ethical standards. I believe you are wrong about the board's users being able to see the content Google spiders index. If Google indexes a private forum and it appears as a search result for a given term, when the searcher clicks the link, they will receive a "No Permissions" message. You have given Google a view of content that no one else can see unless they meet certain requirements. That could be defined as cloaking, but it is almost certainly subterfuge.
Guests get that message even if you disabled forum view and has your forum in index.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eJM (Post 1681235)
I am prejudiced against children. I don't like them. So sue me.

Jim
I think there is a big difference between children,teenagers and adults,although there is a thin line between children and adults.I would like to end this discussion as it's becoming hatred.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:26 AM.
Page 4 of 9 « First 23 4 56 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by vBS
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

X vBulletin 3.8.12 by vBS Debug Information
  • Page Generation 0.03283 seconds
  • Memory Usage 1,782KB
  • Queries Executed 10 (?)
More Information
Template Usage:
  • (1)ad_footer_end
  • (1)ad_footer_start
  • (1)ad_header_end
  • (1)ad_header_logo
  • (1)ad_navbar_below
  • (9)bbcode_quote_printable
  • (1)footer
  • (1)gobutton
  • (1)header
  • (1)headinclude
  • (6)option
  • (1)pagenav
  • (1)pagenav_curpage
  • (4)pagenav_pagelink
  • (1)post_thanks_navbar_search
  • (1)printthread
  • (10)printthreadbit
  • (1)spacer_close
  • (1)spacer_open 
Phrase Groups Available:
  • global
  • postbit
  • showthread
Included Files:
  • ./printthread.php
  • ./global.php
  • ./includes/init.php
  • ./includes/class_core.php
  • ./includes/config.php
  • ./includes/functions.php
  • ./includes/class_hook.php
  • ./includes/modsystem_functions.php
  • ./includes/class_bbcode_alt.php
  • ./includes/class_bbcode.php
  • ./includes/functions_bigthree.php 
Hooks Called:
  • init_startup
  • init_startup_session_setup_start
  • init_startup_session_setup_complete
  • cache_permissions
  • fetch_threadinfo_query
  • fetch_threadinfo
  • fetch_foruminfo
  • style_fetch
  • cache_templates
  • global_start
  • parse_templates
  • global_setup_complete
  • printthread_start
  • pagenav_page
  • pagenav_complete
  • bbcode_fetch_tags
  • bbcode_create
  • bbcode_parse_start
  • bbcode_parse_complete_precache
  • bbcode_parse_complete
  • printthread_post
  • printthread_complete