Secret pagerank

the spamming factors of link donors, which you measure by the number of external links in link building, have NOTHING to DO with The actual Google score. Distortions of your understanding of PageRank transmission issues are monstrous Links to external resources can be regarded as an extension of semantics. For example, a link to a Wikipedia article EXPANDS the semantics of your page. The semantics of the wikepedia page are glued together with the semantics of your page if you specified target="_blank"in the link attribute. This is how you show The Google algorithm that you do not want to let the user leave your page and use the link to provide evidence of your own claims or necessary additions to it. Therefore, in this design, Google's ranking algorithm perceives the external link differently. The emphasis and weight of existing keywords on the page are changed, and their relevance is changed.

When making seo transistors, you should understand these details in detail if you really want to get a good gain and a complementary pair from site1 site2.

Well I spent a long time condensing the information I compiled and sent it to my AI guy. My network admin guy couldn't make heads or tales of anything, not that I expected him to.
But my AI guy just got back to me and his opinion is that this is a melting pot of oxymorons; over-complicating the obvious and over-simplifying the elaborate, post-patent lamenting (I don't know what he means here), no shortage of drunken wishful thinking, all wrapped up nice and neat in a thick wall of intended cryptic inferences to an audience non the wiser about anything they read of it (because it's in fucking Russian) - take your word for it or not. And that an outcome should be
- me being throughly compensated for hours spent analysing useless attention seeking nonsense.
- whoever is responsible stop turning to essence of toad and strange flowers for inspiration if they are taking themselves even remotely seriously about this

The thing op is if you are

busy with other projects and seo is not interesting to

Click to expand...

you, then why are you here talking to us about it, if you're over it?

Oh wait, you also say

If you are interested in my startups in the field of decentralized search algorithms or new types of social networks, I would be happy to discuss the partnership

Click to expand...

Hmm, I guess I won't need read another wave of your nonsense to reply to that one.
GTFO of here with you sales pitching or at least have enough respect for unsuspecting forum members to present better than as if it was written by an tajikistani refugee.

The part about using cryptoassets was intriguing to us both however, though i'm guessing that's more down to the input of Vitalik Buterin et al than your own. So thanks for nothing!

942-1 said:

Well I spent a long time condensing the information I compiled and sent it to my AI guy. My network admin guy couldn't make heads or tales of anything, not that I expected him to.
But my AI guy just got back to me and his opinion is that this is a melting pot of oxymorons; over-complicating the obvious and over-simplifying the elaborate, post-patent lamenting (I don't know what he means here), no shortage of drunken wishful thinking, all wrapped up nice and neat in a thick wall of intended cryptic inferences to an audience non the wiser about anything they read of it (because it's in fucking Russian) - take your word for it or not. And that an outcome should be
- me being throughly compensated for hours spent analysing useless attention seeking nonsense.
- whoever is responsible stop turning to essence of toad and strange flowers for inspiration

The thing op is if you are

you, then why are you here talking to us about it, if you're over it?

Oh wait, you also say



Hmm, I guess I won't need read another wave of your nonsense to reply to that one.
GTFO of here with you sales pitching or at least have enough respect for unsuspecting forum members to present better than as if it was written by an tajikistani refugee.

The part about using cryptoassets was intriguing to us both however, though i'm guessing that's more down to the input of Vitalik Buterin et al than your own. So thanks for nothing!

Click to expand...

Lmaoooo

this is the semantic graph constructed from the keyword " студия звукозаписи" translated as " recording Studio"
for you, I translated those keywords from the graph that fall into the site2 menu

recording Studio,
record a song,
order a song,
sound recording Moscow Studio,
recording song Studio,
the arrangement of the song,
mastering mixing,
song to sing,
order song,
sound recording Moscow,
order minus sign

942-1
with your permission, I will ignore your attack, the purpose of which is either envy or self-promotion in this thread.

Site 1 should have the same keywords list as Site 2 ?

netkam said:

Site 1 should have the same keywords list as Site 2 ?

Click to expand...

No. Commercial and non-commercial graphs differ. The lists will be different. site1 non-commercial site 2 commercial in this case, the link from one site to another is natural and does not cause a conflict of interest when they are checked by Google. How would you react to the words of a fruit seller you approached at the market if he recommended taking fruit from a neighboring seller? Google will ask the same question...and it needs an answer that explains the natural market model. Otherwise, site1 and site2 will be suspected of collusion and will be punished by the afiliat filter.

The key weight shares in the graph are used to understand which accents and in what relation to each other, they should be implemented on the site. If you satisfy the graph's fractions as precisely as possible, you will get the maximum correspondence with the standard stored in Google for evaluating semantic relevance. Otherwise, you will get non-maximum text relevance. This is why graphs are so important in building transistor models.

If you do not know how to build commercial and non-commercial graphs, you will have to make lists yourself, based on your knowledge of the subject and its business. In any case, you should create sites with different business models with the same theme. On one site you sell a product, on another site you either tell about the product, or sell some services. You need to show the Google algorithm that your "fruit" is at least different from the" fruit " of a neighboring seller on the market, and the link to it is justified.

As you can see, not everything is as simple as it seems at first glance, and there are a lot of nuances that should be observed. I don't think any of you will be able to use seo transistor technology without help. But I sincerely wish you to succeed. Maybe one and a half or 2 years after the start of the experiments

"You can't catch a fish out of a pond without difficulty" Russian proverb.

Russians are extremely lazy. In part, the lack of popularity of my technology in Russia is due to this. It is much easier for us to go the way of deception. 95% of our seo experts are just deceiving the customers for cash. At the same time, every second seo Guru. The desire to learn something and work is extremely low. Everyone is looking for the money button. This is our national favorite activity. We even have a proverb like this: "work loves fools." In all our folk tales, heroes are fools, and so I really hope that you will replicate the technology, wrap it in a beautiful package, and invest in its promotion...And then I will become famous in my homeland as an author And even then it is unlikely Because it is not accepted in our country.
Immediately come running such as 942-1 and pour a bucket of slops. Even advertising with slops will be given out of envy. To be honest, I'm very surprised that he got out here alone. On Russian forums such as he in the thread usually 80-90%. We have a lot of scientific discoveries and technologies, but no one uses them until someone steals them from you and sells them to us for millions We are very different in everything...and that's fine.

Earning money with work and intelligence is generally considered unfashionable in our country. This is not welcome, does not cause respect from others. On the contrary, success that came by chance, unreasonably, is valued especially strongly. Everyone wants to be close to the lucky one in the hope that some of the luck will fall to them If you are the son of rich parents, you are more respected than if you earned it yourself. Because everyone knows that if you earned it yourself, it's by accident and the money will soon run out, and luck is unlikely to happen a second time. But rich parents aren't going anywhere. Therefore, girls prefer these, and not those who have achieved something themselves It seems strange to you, but that's how it is

@tar729 How long did it take for the two sites in your example to outrank yandex? And this happened in 2016 and without you building any links?

3 months
there were no links to these sites.
in the example, these sites are TOP1 TOP2 if someone did not understand. Yandex TOP3 All that is above is contextual advertising.

site 2 lasted in the Yandex TOP10 for a year and a half. in TOP1, it was about 3 months. For about a year it was TOP6 Both sites slid smoothly down and the gap between them increased. The positions of sites in Google were also in the TOP10 for the first few months. Recently, in Yandex, site 2 occupied the TOP12-13 and site 1 flew to the TOP20. Then both sites were not in the Top100 Yandex. The sharp penalization of both sites in Yandex occurred due to extremely low click factors and almost 100% percent of departures. Yandex finally realized that before him-a-fake-sites. We must still understand that people were looking for a Yandex site to order advertising directly from Yandex, and not to read what advertising is in Yandex.

In Google, sites quickly lost their positions and stabilized in the TOP30 area until the end of the site's existence. The graphs of Yandex and Google are different, so the results for Google were initially worse. If I were making a transistor using a graph of Google, then Yandex would not have been such a success. My goal was exclusively Yandex. I was even somewhat surprised that the Yandex graph sites were in the TOP of Google. Other seo transistors also showed much more modest results in Google for the same reason. I knew that the quality of semantic cores is crucial in technology. Another interesting point is this:

A lot of envious people and detractors started complaining to Yandex about my sites. But this had no effect. Usually, after these steps, assessors Yandex carefully considered the complaint and examined for the presence of violations. Since the assessors could not detect any violations, no one in Yandex touched my sites. In addition, I think they themselves were interested in seeing how my technology works.

tar729 said:

3 months
there were no links to these sites.
in the example, these sites are TOP1 TOP2 if someone did not understand. Yandex TOP3 All that is above is contextual advertising.

Click to expand...

Strange how ahrefs reports otherwise, a sudden backlinks increase in 2014 for both sites in your example.

Google's attitude to my technology, and indeed to any technology, is "soft" and cautious. Google is a responsible company and understands the importance of any algorithm solutions on a global scale. Therefore, for a long time, Google did not have many ranking parameters that allowed it effective manual control. But with the advent of self-learning of greedy algorithms, competitors, and especially mad Yandex (which never cared about the position of sites, even big business), technological gap has become a dangerous rise, and Google had to implement its learning algorithm. Yandex has long been independently giving birth and removing new ranking factors, most of which do not even have names and meaning. That is, they look like "dependency # 23589" and so on. What kind of addiction is this, no one even understands Yandex. The algorithm generates and kills them in batches. It tests itself and checks its effectiveness. And all on the living, on the blood of business. Business for Yandex is a Guinea pig.
(The Russian tradition of government. What state-such and Yandex ). According to Yandex marketing Director A. Sebrant, only behavioral factors born of Yandex's insane AI are around 2500 in 2017. And this is only a behavioral class of ranking factors! Google slowly and gradually expands the base number of ranking factors and keeps the manual mode, while AI uses it to carefully search for new factors. Google doesn't trust AI to steer the search itself. Yandex has long passed the steering wheel to AI. But this does not mean that the algorithms of Yandex and Google are different. Not at all. Just Google GENTLY introduces the same additional factors as Yandex, BUT...only those that have been polished to a Shine and checked.

I did not put links until both sites hit the TOP1-2. the links appeared after I started promoting this case and its results.

FNTK said:

Strange how ahrefs reports otherwise, a sudden backlinks increase in 2014 for both sites in your example.

Click to expand...

Subsequently, both sites became the subject of numerous experiments on my part. I actually raped them and their structure and content changed dramatically. You understand that for research and development of technology details, such high-quality cases have the highest experimental value.
In fact, their removal was due to the fact that after the rape there was nothing to look at...they died for science under the scalpel of a mad surgeon...say so

From the developer of the technology, it is quite unexpected to expect some kind of trick. This is a scientific activity. Scientists don't do that. They move science and technology to make it work. Purity of experiments is an essential condition, like our father. My scientific activity and relevant principles are visible in all my projects and results. Inventing such complex and amazing technologies for the sake of deception is like shooting sparrows out of a cannon. You can cheat with much less labor, and not ruin decades of your life for it.
Please apply your doubts to ordinary people.