(10)
Last night I covered at Search Engine Land based on Google's Matt Cutts keynote at SMX Advanced that Google has launched a new reconsideration request process to help Googlers give more feedback during the reconsideration request rejection process.
It seems like now, Googlers have a box they can opt to use, when rejecting a reconsideration request to give more detailed, hand typed, details about why the reconsideration request was rejected.
Prior, Googlers seemed to be only able add a few example links or pick from a templated response. Now, they can pick the template but in the workflow, they have the option of adding a custom tailored, hand written, response to the webmaster who submitted the reconsideration request that is being rejected.
Matt Cutts made it clear that this does not mean all rejection notices will have that extra feedback, but potentially many can because the internal process at Google has been updated to support it better.
@Dre_Nico more like the details can be provided. They won't automatically be provided for every request..
— Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) June 12, 2014This is launching today, so as soon as we see some public examples, we will show how they differ from the previous rejection responses.
Comments:
CaptainKevin
06/12/2014 01:26 pm
I heard the reason why Google would not respond personally to reconsideration requests is because the Googlers reading them were based in low wage countries and had limited understanding of the English language. Does this mean reconsideration requests will now be reviewed by people residing in the same country as the webmaster submitting the request?
F1 Steve
06/12/2014 02:22 pm
I heard all reconsideration requests will now be passed onto Durant who only has a "naughty" stamp but plenty of unhelpful opinions to share?
Marie Haynes
06/12/2014 02:27 pm
I am guessing that they'll mostly be using this to tell site owners about problems such as: "You've disavowed on the url level but we're still seeing links at the domain level." "Your share settings are set to private so we can't see your Google Docs evidence." I doubt that there will be a huge amount of detail given in this extra area...but we'll see...
Tian_Mian
06/12/2014 02:55 pm
Sounds promising.
Art Enke
06/12/2014 03:57 pm
Is it a coincidence that this coincides with the spammy queries 3.0 update?http://selnd.com/1s7qEYm This will come in handy because some of my clients are getting hammered by Negative SEO (via "payday loan" anchor text pointing deep pages on their site) and its frustrating getting canned responses in Webmaster Tools.
Barry Schwartz
06/12/2014 04:01 pm
maybe
Jamo
06/12/2014 04:17 pm
Just because they can give more information doesn't mean that they will. Come on people, this is the G PR machine in full effect. Don't expect more information.
Thomas
06/12/2014 08:07 pm
woah, for real? How can they decide quality if they cant read it? Makes no sense at all... is that true? Unbelievably illogical if thats the case. Has to be native speaking reviewers otherwise their is no way to say the content is not good quality or even on topic. Or at least have first language mods/reviewers.
Andy McIlwain
06/13/2014 03:00 pm
Sounds like a status-quo ticketing system. Choose from template replies, modify as needed, or write your own. Surprising that it took this long to implement it.
Robert Fisher
06/16/2014 12:19 pm
That is a very interesting thought Marie.