Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sacked by a Google algorithm

duckworksmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 300 posts

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#81

Post by drawkbox »

lynx44 wrote: post #30

This sucks, but telling your visitors to click on ads indirectly is a clear violation of the ToS. I too got fired by Google's algorithm and didn't do anything whatsoever wrong. They are heartless. Worse of all, this article does not mention the monopoly they have. They own the online ad market. No one else exists that is anywhere as good. It's straight-up monopoly, and if you get on their black list, you're out.

Does anyone actually get paid by Google Adsense? Almost everyone I know has been kicked from it, not early on but usually when a big payment is coming.

And this bit about returning the funds to advertisers? Any advertisers ever gotten money returned due to click fraud?

I love Google and pay for lots of their products (docs/storage, appengine, etc) but the adsense stuff seems very shady on Google's side as well. Maybe it is my misunderstanding but I know noone making good money on Google Adsense.

Granted this dude was violating the ToS but I know plenty of people kicked just before payment and with no reason for it. It seems like smaller sites or medium content sites they are glad to use for free ad space until it comes time to pay dues. I imagine there is lots of free advertising space and metrics gained from these situations.

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#82

Post by phr »

If you own several different media properties like this guy, is it a good strategy to incorporate each one separately, to keep an unintentional Adsense TOS violation from affecting all the others?

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#83

Post by larrik »

This is why a lot of subscription websites (which this was, apparently), don't display ads to logged in users. A small dedicated audience looks like click-fraud. Adsense and the like is best for drive-by visitors.

I did that even with my own websites, even though there is no subscription fee. Logged-in users get no ads, because I don't want them to click on them.

There was a similar issue on HN a long time ago (years?), but I can never find past articles that I'm looking for.

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#84

Post by dusklight »

Ok this is obviously only one side of the story and the guy who is writing it is obviously a good writer? He knows how to manipulate the emotions of the reader with stuff like losing money right before christmas, which he keeps talking about over and over again even though that is entirely irrelevant to the facts of the case.

What we have here is,

Google says he is click frauding.

He says he is not click frauding.

The real problem is, maybe Google is right and this guy is a click frauder. We don't really know because Google shows no proof, holds no trial, allows no mediated appeal. As a company, not a government, they can get away with that. But as companies get larger and larger what is the difference between a company and a government?

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#85

Post by jdietrich »

arn wrote: post #14

...long story... Oh yes, I was also running little blocks of adverts provided by Adsense and, yes, I told my subscribers that I got some money if they visited the websites of those advertisers – all of whom were interested in selling stuff to sailors. ...long story... In the end it was click-fraud-ish. There's a huge fear for those dependent on google adsense that they will get terminated out of the blue like this. T…

Also:

If a sailor buys a sailing book by entering Amazon via my website, I get a 5 per cent referral fee. If some-one spends $200 on a Kindle or a camera, [they] get their next three month s subscription for free.

That's definitely abuse of Amazon's affiliate program and crosses the line from click-fraud-ish to full blown criminal fraud. Aside from being against the terms of their scheme, his clear intention is to induce site visitors to make planned purchases through his affiliate links, something that is obviously completely contrary to the spirit of his agreement with Amazon.

The author abused his relationship with Google. He treated his most important customer as a cash cow. He ignores the fact that many of the advertisers footing the bill will be just like him - sole traders and small businesses barely scraping by. By cutting him off, Google is losing revenue to protect the integrity of their advertising marketplace. They're doing the decent thing by their advertisers in taking a cheat out of the system. I wholeheartedly support Google in their actions.

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#86

Post by geekinthecorner »

dusklight wrote: post #84

Ok this is obviously only one side of the story and the guy who is writing it is obviously a good writer? He knows how to manipulate the emotions of the reader with stuff like losing money right before christmas, which he keeps talking about over and over again even though that is entirely irrelevant to the facts of the case. What we have here is, Google says he is click frauding. He says he is not click frauding. Th…

Speak for yourself, I'm an atheist, losing(or wasting) money before zombie day is the intended purpose of the holiday, isn't it? Does it really illicit extra emotions?

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#87

Post by kellysutton »

Based on personal experiences, it appears that any two parties doing business under an "American" contract are at any time probably in violation of several clauses of said contract. When the waters get a little rough, you can expect the party with the most leverage to bail.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but other countries don't interpret contracts so strictly. I remember someone telling me that German business contracts are often written with intentions and principles, rather than rules.

That way, people are encouraged to do "good business" and not resort to the algorithm. Legalese is just a way to cover your ass in a bad scenario; it's not designed to build better businesses.

Full disclosure: I work for blip.tv. I am biased.

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#89

Post by snorkel »

mcyger wrote: post #13

For as many articles that there are about how great, smart, [fill in another positive adjective] Google is, I'm surprised that no news source has pointed out the ridiculous behavior of Google. Who else would you work with (i.e., display advertising for) without having the ability to speak to someone by telephone when a difficult situation has occurred? None of our customers would tolerate this -- why do we continue t…

Good point. With thousands of dollars at stake one ought to be able to speak to a human and have a reconciliation process.

Re: Sacked by a Google algorithm

#90

Post by EGreg »

jdietrich wrote: post #85
arn wrote: post #14

...long story... Oh yes, I was also running little blocks of adverts provided by Adsense and, yes, I told my subscribers that I got some money if they visited the websites of those advertisers – all of whom were interested in selling stuff to sailors. ...long story... In the end it was click-fraud-ish. There's a huge fear for those dependent on google adsense that they will get terminated out of the blue like this. T…

Also: If a sailor buys a sailing book by entering Amazon via my website, I get a 5 per cent referral fee. If some-one spends $200 on a Kindle or a camera, [they] get their next three month s subscription for free. That's definitely abuse of Amazon's affiliate program and crosses the line from click-fraud-ish to full blown criminal fraud. Aside from being against the terms of their scheme, his clear intention is to in…

While Google's customers ARE the advertisers and their first priority is to make sure they are protected, Google would sit up and do something if more website PUBLISHERS would complain. It's a business.

However, as a practical issue, I fail to see any practical reason to disable the guy's revenue from YouTube videos, based on clicks from an unrelated site. Just stop counting the clicks on the site, Google!

Post reply on HN