Rip Off Report.com?
-
Who has had dealing with Rip Off Report.com
They posted a "rip off report" about my client. At the top of the site it has a banner to hire an SEO that can get rid of this "negative online reputation."
Black Hat?
-
Ripoff Report is itself a ripoff.
People who write negative reports are usually unwitting dupes.
(in a few cases they may be competitors.)
In any event, Ripoff Report's real business is extracting fees for "mediation services" and "customer satisfaction" programs to get negative stuff removed...even though it says it has a non-removal policy.
It is a very bad company that has been the subject of many lawsuits -- but stays just within the law to do its dirty business. One court called its business practices "appalling" -- even as it upheld them.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripoff_Report
Do not attempt to rebut negative reports on the site; this will just increase their prominence. Under no circumstances contact Ripoff Report or anyone claiming to have the ability to mitigate bad reports. It's like dealing with blackmailers. You just encourage ever higher fees.
The only solution is to adopt a "publish and be damned" attitude and then do the hard SEO work to get the negative review pushed down in SERPs.
-
I just googled ripoff report and the 1st pay per click that came up was this link saying that they would help anybody who needed to remove their name from ripoff report.com I can't speak to the legitimacy of this company or say this is the way to go I would still like to hear what SEOmoz has to say simply because this is something that search engine optimization companies use as a way to attract people I do not offer this service however that does not mean it is something that is illegitimate or should not be offered. Here is the link to the company that came up number 1 pay per click not organic in Google when searching ripoff report
http://www.removeyourname.com/index.html
You may want to make sure they have an agreement with you that you will receive the results you requested or your money back.
Sincerely,
Thomas Zickell
-
Just so I am on the same page.
You are representing the client the has been put on the " ripoff report.com website" and you feel it is not a legitimate report but one made by possibly a competitor or somebody committing an act of malice?
if what I said is correct I would say the best way of going about it is to contact ripoff report.com at that point explained to them why you believe it is a fraudulent representation of your client and I doubt they'll give you the information of "who did it" however if you asked them enough about the case I am certain that is a good way to start. Because and I'm not an expert please remember on this exact topic however ripoff report is a business and from what I understand they are trying to be legitimate so I'm sure there must be some due diligence into any sort of report documents, e-mails that type of stuff if you can prove the e-mail is fake let's say somebody did lie about your clients business and stated things that are blatantly untrue they probably did not use their corporate e-mail and if they did use e-mail that should be all public information at least public to you the person that has a vested interest in defending your client. However search engine optimization companies often do state they will "remove negative information regarding clients" or whatever I feel if you think it is a fraudulent claim that your best like is dealing directly with the source I could be very wrong so please understand I strongly suggest you use your free private question with SEOmoz you can do that simply by asking a question and marking it private you only get one a month however the information given is really 1st class and I think one of the most valuable parts of being and SEOMoz member. however wall were here I would love to hear what SEOmoz thinks themselves.
Also when you said Black Hat?
If you are talking about the person who did do this and they are doing it just to hurt your client absolutely that is one of the most horrible black hat techniques anyone can use against somebody.
I hope I've been of help to you.
Respectfully,
Thomas
PS Just got out of hospital and have not been available
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
I have made my new website live. But while checking in Google it is not showing in search result ( site: www.oomfr.com ). Can anybody please advice.
Hi Team, I have made my new website live. But while checking in Google it is not showing in search result ( site: www.oomfr.com ). Can anybody please advice.
Technical SEO | | nlogix0 -
Dulpicate Content being reported
Hi I have a new client whose first MA crawl report is showing lots of duplicate content. The main batch of these are all the HP url with an 'attachment' part at the end such as: www.domain.com/?attachment_id=4176 As far as i can tell its some sort of slide show just showing a different image in the main frame of each page, with no other content. Each one does have a unique meta title & H1 though. Whats the best thing to do here ? Not a problem and leave as is Use the paremeter handling tool in GWT Canonicalise, referencing the HP or other solution ? Many Thanks Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Rottentomatoes.com - mobile ranks better than desktop?
Howdy Mozzers, I don't see this very often but figured I would share my findings, no surprise that I found a huge portal like rottentomatoes.com ranking for the keyword: new on dvd , but for the last month or so - the page that is indexed for it is their "mobile" view. ( Screen Shot Attached ) I have a few ideas how you could go about fixing this - but just more of a conversation piece - have many of you ever seen such a thing - especially on a portal so big? Your pal, Chenzo ScreenShot2014-12-02at101927AM_zps107789f1.png
Technical SEO | | Chenzo0 -
Rel=canonical - Identical .com and .us Version of Site
We have a .us and a .com version of our site that we direct customers to based on location to servers. This is not changing for the foreseeable future. We had restricted Google from crawling the .us version of the site and all was fine until I started to see the https version of the .us appearing in the SERPs for certain keywords we keep an eye on. The .com still exists and is sometimes directly above or under the .us. It is occasionally a different page on the site with similar content to the query, or sometimes it just returns the exact same page for both the .com and the .us results. This has me worried about duplicate content issues. The question(s): Should I just get the https version of the .us to not be crawled/indexed and leave it at that or should I work to get a rel=canonical set up for the entire .us to .com (making the .com the canonical version)? Are there any major pitfalls I should be aware of in regards to the rel=canonical across the entire domain (both the .us and .com are identical and these newly crawled/indexed .us pages rank pretty nicely sometimes)? Am I better off just correcting it so the .us is no longer crawled and indexed and leaving it at that? Side question: Have any ecommerce guys noticed that Googlebot has started to crawl/index and serve up https version of your URLs in the SERPs even if the only way to get into those versions of the pages are to either append the https:// yourself to the URL or to go through a sign in or check out page? Is Google, in the wake of their https everywhere and potentially making it a ranking signal, forcing the check for the https of any given URL and choosing to index that? I just can't figure out how it is even finding those URLs to index if it isn't seeing http://www.example.com and then adding the https:// itself and checking... Help/insight on either point would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | TLM0 -
Application/x-msdownload in crawl report?
In a crawl report for my company's site, the "content_type_header" column usually contains "text/html". But there are some random pages with "application/x-msdownload"... what does "application/x-msdownload" mean? <colgroup><col width="121"></colgroup>
Technical SEO | | JimLynch
| |0 -
Are these links on timeout.com passing any value?
http://www.timeout.com/competition/ALHDubrovnik?DCMP=EMC-Travel-2011-07-14 The links pass through an internal system e.g. www.timeout.com/extern_link/?http://www.alh.hr Or what is the benefit to timeout of doing this? Cheers S
Technical SEO | | firstconversion0 -
Does anyone see benefit in .com/en vs .com/uk for a UK site?
The client is already on /en and in my opinion there is not much to be gained by switching to /uk
Technical SEO | | Red_Mud_Rookie0