it's not cloaking.... its duplicate content, link weight/consensous.
if you have 40000 index.php?sid=xxxxxxxxxxxxx style pages, which one gets picked to be indexed?
This is a discussion on phpbb has one now too within the Off-Topic & Chit Chat forums, part of the Focus on Members category; it's not cloaking.... its duplicate content, link weight/consensous. if you have 40000 index.php?sid=xxxxxxxxxxxxx style pages, which one gets picked to ...
it's not cloaking.... its duplicate content, link weight/consensous.
if you have 40000 index.php?sid=xxxxxxxxxxxxx style pages, which one gets picked to be indexed?
The duplicate content issue is actually why I implemented that SE reactive code. Then a competitor with a commercial solution started suggesting that my method was cloaking, which is why I mentioned that here.
But yes, dup content is the reason for my implementation method, and has avoided users of my product from getting any dup content penalties (as when an SE is detected, all urls in the current page get cleaned, as well as the current page url that's being visited).
Granted, this isn't the best solution, but for a free product, it's as far as I'm willing ot go ;-)
Long time since I've been with phpBB, but some of phpBB forums rank higher than vBulletin forums, even without clean looking URLs.![]()