White Hat Cloaking

  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #1

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,150
White Hat Cloaking: It Exists. It's Permitted. It's Useful.
I'll begin with a quote from Google's Guidelines on Cloaking:

Serving up different results based on user agent may cause your site to be perceived as deceptive and removed from the Google index.

There are two critical pieces in that sentence - "may" and "user agent." Now, it's true that if you cloak in the wrong ways, with the wrong intent, Google (and the other search engines) "may" remove you from their index, and if you do it egregiously, they certainly will. But, in many cases, it's the right thing to do, both from a user experience perspective and from an engine's.
Read the complete blog post Here.
 

smirkley

ID'mazing
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
1,167
The article, although informational, largely directs to tactics of safely targeting advertisements as landing pages from search engine sourced traffic.

I can see why google and the likes provides opportunities to webmasters like this. It serves both the webmaster and the advertising network.

I dont see this benefitting traffic conversion for a forum though, as it is hard enough getting eyeballs that stick let alone non-bouncing sign-ups.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #3

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,150
True, and besides that it's a bit dated. I posted this because there's been a few posts lately suggesting that anything done differently for bots and guests is automatically considered bad by Google.
 

mysiteguy

Migration Expert
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
3,079
True, and besides that it's a bit dated. I posted this because there's been a few posts lately suggesting that anything done differently for bots and guests is automatically considered bad by Google.
It is automatically considered bad by Google if you don't do it correctly.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #5

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,150
It is automatically considered bad by Google if you don't do it correctly.
Right... so I suppose that means that if someone isn't 100% sure they're doing it correctly they shouldn't be doing it at all. But apparently white hat cloaking does exist....
 

mysiteguy

Migration Expert
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
3,079
Right... so I suppose that means that if someone isn't 100% sure they're doing it correctly they shouldn't be doing it at all. But apparently white hat cloaking does exist....
Obviously it does exist because Google documents when it's appropriate, and how to do it so their engine "knows" the information is behind a login, paywall, limited number of month reads, etc. As with anything, if someone is not 100% sure, then it's a matter of possible risk verses reward.
 
Top