Discovered the @poolkidsband yesterday ... then discovered they are from Tallahassee , which is where I spent about 2 years pretending to be a musician in the early 2000s... and im now obsessed
LLM word choices remind me of my days as a 7th grade english teacher. Just using random fancy words in the midst of blah writing to trick me into thinking its a good writer
@lilyraynyc or TRYING to target algorithmically. We saw this with links. They used manual actions to glean information on links. They wouldn't give you all the links that were problematic, they would give you one or two and say give us everything.
this thread with @DavidGQuaid has me legitimately confused on many levels. I am sure he is a wonderful person and he is just looking out for the good of the SEO community. However, not sure where what I am saying is wrong
@davesnyder I've been doing this for 20 years :) and started filing Recon Requests 12 years ago and haven't had any since because we don't ever buy links or scale content.
@DavidGQuaid@ianhowells also, as noted in the other thread, none of my observations have to do with algo update ... Google cant spot AI content at scale.. this is all about manual review and risk associated with that
@DavidGQuaid@ianhowells unfortunately not everyone can access your personal objective standard, and some don't have their own. I dont buy anything Google says, but i do need to understand the level of risk if I enact a strategy for a client/customer
@DavidGQuaid@ianhowells Risk increases with scale on everything. 5 page site you build 5 links to, its not getting trapped in an algo or manual review triggers. 500,000 page site you are aggressively building links to and went from 5 pages to 500k in 1 month, tons of risk
@DavidGQuaid@ianhowells Their link policy is just as broad. If you put any effort into getting a link beyond putting the content up and attracting them then it could be link manipulation i.e. guest blogging was fine until it wasnt