Can VBSeo help with this?

lionheart78 · #1 01-02-2008, 04:17 PM

I don't know all vbseo's features but I'm very interested. But I have a few "gotchas" that I am going to be programming in and around. So let me know if vbseo can work.

1. Our site requires registration to read posts. Currently we do have a mod installed to allow search engines to read posts without registration so just wondering if vbseo has something similar so i can just use vbseo. And obviously we don't have any rss or other pages that can be read without login.

2. We're going to be setting it up so only posts after a specific date can be read by search engines. I can probably code this in vbulletin but can vbseo handle this or be coded to do it for me?

3. We want to set up a bbcode tag that basically allows the user to block search engines from seeing portions of a post. Is this possible?

I know it's a bit odd and there are reasons behind it all, but let me know what can or can't be done.

Thanks in advance.

briansol · #2 01-02-2008, 04:22 PM

1) vbseo will work with the mod no problem. BUT, it's not a good idea. it's considered cloaking by google and may get you banned from them permanently.

2) why? you probably want all your content indexed, no? vbseo helps index all your content.

3) this isn't possible unless you again using cloaking techniques, but either way vbseo has no effect on it

lionheart78 · #3 01-02-2008, 04:41 PM

For #1, do you know for sure this is considered cloaked and will cause issues? This topic was debated on the addon page at vbulletin and I see a number of sites that do this that are pretty large and rank well in google such as experts-exchange.com and a few others. I don't see why this would get you banned since the content is there, it just requires you to log in to view it.

For 2, it's because this forum has historically not been indexed and so previous posts and posters were under that assumption. So we're thinking of just having new posts indexed.

For #3, we'd have the unregistered search engine users posts simply drop off the stuff they don't want seen by search engines (registered users could see it all). I guess this is reverse from normal as we're simply not having search engines see parts of posts (rather than adding or changing content for search engines). So not sure on the cloaking issue what search engines would look at it like if it's reported and someone manually checks.

briansol · #4 01-02-2008, 04:52 PM

Cloaking: Cloaking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

experts exchange uses a different technique. if you scroll all the way down, you can see it answer in plain text as a guest. the blurred images are a poy to get you to register, but the content is there on the page, 20 scrolls later. its not cloaking.

Why not index everything? no sense in spending time to NOT index it....
it would be a manual process of adding each topic to your robots.txt file, not fun.

For the bbcode, you're talking like vb.org uses to only show code blocks to paid VB owners?

so long as google sees "login to see xxxxxx" your good. but if you show google the results, you're cloaking.

Joe Ward · #5 01-02-2008, 05:07 PM

1. If you do this, be forewarned that it may result in penalization. Remember, that it can also effect your traffic stickiness. Visitors may not stick around long enough to register when they can click 'Back' and find the next *open* search result.

2. vBSEO will rewrite all pages regardless of whether they are visible to search engines or not. Obviously, the more that is available, *in general*, the better.

3. You should be able to get a modification developed that will remove content enclosed in a custom bbCode when the search engines visit the site. If you do this, it's best to remove it for all guest visitors as well.

lionheart78 · #6 01-02-2008, 05:09 PM

Didn't know that about experts-exchange. Guess I never scrolled that far.

I may have to take the risk. I'm still not sure how big it would be since it would require someone to report, someone to manually visit, and for them to believe we're trying to do something wrong (like trying to provide different content). Since all we're trying to do is make it so search engines don't have to register (so they can see the same content a registered user sees).

So by the strict definition on cloaking it's therefore impossible to require registration on a site to read posts and have search engines be able to index it. Correct? or is there some other method?

For the old non-indexed, I was going to simply set it up so search engines could get access to current threads but old threads (prior to whatever starting date) it wouldn't let them see (just basically enforce the login requirements on the old threads for search engines). I wish I could simply go about indexing it all but the old threads getting indexed would cause more uproar than I care to deal with.

And for the blocked stuff, I guess it would be similar to vbulletin.org where it only shows code to registered owners. Haven't poked around enough to see this in action but it sounds like we'd be doing something similar.

lionheart78 · #7 01-02-2008, 05:20 PM

Thanks Joe (saw your post after posting my last).

For the penalty possibility, obviously I don't like it if it happens but right now the entire site is blocked from being read by search engines. So we get virtually no traffic from them now. So this would keep the users happy as well as possibly get us some traffic. And I still think if a person reviews at whatever search engine they'll see that it's not different content, just requires registration (which is free) to read.

For "stickiness", our forum is very specific in it's market. There is no forum covering the same area with anywhere near the same value (literally only known of 2 other forums in the area and they've got maybe 2 dozen posts compared to something like 50,000 or more posts in ours over the past 8 years). So they might go elsewhere but I can guarantee they won't get the same info. They might leave and try elsewhere but since they aren't seeing us now from the search engines and for most topics they won't get the answers they need elsewhere it's something we'll just have to deal with.

briansol · #8 01-02-2008, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lionheart78

So by the strict definition on cloaking it's therefore impossible to require registration on a site to read posts and have search engines be able to index it. Correct? or is there some other method?

pretty much.

a search engine should be treated as a 'guest' visitor. whatever they see, google should see the same thing.

Quote:

For the old non-indexed, I was going to simply set it up so search engines could get access to current threads but old threads (prior to whatever starting date) it wouldn't let them see

the only 'good' way do to this is to constantly move stuff.
set up 1 forum thats visble and one thats not...
after certain cut-off, move the threads into the non visible forum.
then google will turn those pages into supplemental results, and enevtually remove them from the index.

i still don't see why you want to do this. Old topics have keywords to drive traffic in them too

briansol · #9 01-02-2008, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lionheart78

For "stickiness", our forum is very specific in it's market. There is no forum covering the same area with anywhere near the same value (literally only known of 2 other forums in the area and they've got maybe 2 dozen posts compared to something like 50,000 or more posts in ours over the past 8 years). So they might go elsewhere but I can guarantee they won't get the same info. They might leave and try elsewhere but since they aren't seeing us now from the search engines and for most topics they won't get the answers they need elsewhere it's something we'll just have to deal with.

i don't understand this..

Why make them register to read?

You're probably turning off more people than you are gaining (I know me, if i hit a result and it makes me register, i click back and go to the next google result).

If they can read your post free, it will encourage them to chime in with their 2 cents instead of pissing them off for 5 min registerring, waiting for the email to come, waiting, waiting.... and then trying to find the thread again because the activation link doesn't take you to the thread.

lionheart78 · #10 01-02-2008, 05:28 PM

Trust me. I'd love to have the old stuff indexed. It has to do with the forum, what's been done over the years, and the politics involved. It's a business related forum and has to do with a lot of different factors.

I'll have to think about moving them to another forum section. I'm doing a reorganization at the same time but if I only set it up for the new areas then there won't be any live posts so I'll have to see what thoughts I have. Hmmm......

I think it may come down to making the changes I need to make and then seeing about adding vbseo after I get the rest of the upheaval complete.

Joe Ward · #11 01-02-2008, 05:32 PM

An interesting way to do this would be to only archive content older than a certain age (6 months to 1 year) that have had 0 search engine hits, or how really low content quality only. Threads with no distinct keywords in the title, low character count in the post, and 0 to minimal replies.

This, of course, could be done manually by a moderator or moderating team.

However, we do optimize on a thread by thread basis. Therefore, we encourage having as many distinct threads available as possible regardless of the age, provided the content in those threads is something that can pulled traffic. For a niche site, there will be a high %-age of threads that can potentially pull traffic.

For a more general topic, or highly competitive topic, there is a lower traffic %-age for the entire thread base.

This decision would have to be made very carefully. Stuff like "my first post - hello" is not going to do much good for you. Reduction of this type of content may be valuable in boosting the overall content "signal to noise" ratio for your forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by briansol

the only 'good' way do to this is to constantly move stuff.
set up 1 forum thats visble and one thats not...
after certain cut-off, move the threads into the non visible forum.
then google will turn those pages into supplemental results, and enevtually remove them from the index.

i still don't see why you want to do this. Old topics have keywords to drive traffic in them too

lionheart78 · #12 01-02-2008, 05:36 PM

If i'm able to set up the bbcode to block portions of a post it may be possible that down the road I may be able to sell the idea of making registration not required (users post things they don't want casually read or found by a normal search engine user), but that's a ways down the road. All the oddities have to do with the community and the forum, and what was all mutually decided for a number of reasons, not all valid IMO but they're there none the less.

I can pretty much guarantee registration lowers the number of signups but luckily since everyone in our forum has a business reason for being there (literally money in their pockets) it's not quite as bad as something more casual.

Joe Ward · #13 01-02-2008, 05:42 PM

That is true. As long as you have a niche market cornered, with few viable alternatives, you will continue to convert better than more generic sites, or those in highly competitive topic areas.