3 ms·
Doing a site:digg.com/news/ search on Bing shows a lot of pages like these: http://digg.com/news/gaming/ing_bank_i_ilanlar http://digg.com/news/gaming/ing_ban
by blauwbilgorgel 14y ago
Doing a site:digg.com/news/ search on Bing shows a lot of pages like these:
http://digg.com/news/gaming/ing_bank_i_ilanlar http://digg.com/news/gaming/ing_bank_i_ilanlar
and even more duplicate tag and rss pages for "site:digg.com/tag/" and "site:digg.com rss".
These /news/ pages 302 redirect to many different sites (some are bound to contain spam or be of lower quality).
302 redirects for these links is bad practice. Some link shorteners (ab)use 302 Found (instead of 301 Moved Permanently) to hoard content that doesn't belong to them. The content for these links can't be found on digg.com, so they too use the wrong redirect and associate themselves with all pages they link to.
Besides that: Digg.com acts like a single page webapp for most of its content. There are no discussion pages or detail pages for the stories. The content that does appear is near duplicate to other content on the web, especially with popular stories, where many blogs just copy the title and the first intro paragraph.
- tracker1 14y agoIt's funny, but I've been pretty careful to add the nocache,noindex headers for many of the pages on the site I work on where a given page is no longer active... also, I would think that digg would maybe consider a rel=nofollow for any links that aren't "popular" yet. That may be the best way to handle the link spam.
- ChuckMcM 14y agoI saw a similar pattern in the links that remain, it's sad to see the link authority of a site get plundered, and it seems like something inside Google's indexer realized that was going on and deleted it. As a search engine its something you have to do if you want to consider site authority in your ranking model.