PLEASE ONLY PARTICIPATION WITH PEOPLE AFFECTED BY GOOGLE SANDBOX (AKA: 30-day WAITING PERIOD) you know you are affected if you have tons of keywords in the serps that are not moving up even with strong backlinks and your site is fairly new 5 months or newer. This thread is to compare data with each other. Seems not everyone was effected. Lets compare instead of blabbing. Lets see if anything related matches up. I am going to ask a series of questions that relates to my affected website. #1) How Old is your website? Mine is a little over 3 months #2) Have you built a large amount of contextual web 2.0's or Blog Links lately in the last 30 days? Yes #3) Were you building high PR Contextual links fast? Considered fast in spurts of a few a day or sometimes none? Or PBN links of 3 or more at a time some days? Yes #4) What CMS are you using? Word Press #5) Do you have Adsense on your website? NO #6) What General niche is your affected site in? Video Games #7) how many unique articles/pages does your site have and is it already monetized for certain keywords? Over 90 unique articles and yes its monetized for those keywords #8) Are you unable to move on the first page for low comp long tail keywords that have 1,000 plus search volume? Yes, I have many keywords some longtails are hovering on second page, currently test to see if they hit the first page or not. Seems like they are laggy. #9) Have you built high pr blog comments to some of these pages affected? Yes I know there are other threads but this is the question and answer thread. Compare and contrast thread. I hope its a 30 days or 60 day thing and not a new perminate penalty to make us suffer. Might be why Matt Cutts took a vacation because he knew this new algorithm would catch many new sites building links too fast. Starting to think the sandbox is caused by building contextual high DA/PA or PR links too fast when your site is new. Contextual links are rare and to have many built too fast without any viral traffic or social metrics seems might be a new trigger. Or maybe the age of the link acquired for the new site page? Maybe links are counting a lot less for newer sites. Like new links also need to be aged before they count for a new website?