It is a regular reply, nothing else. I would imagine that 9 times out of five when Google get a message of a site that's dropped into oblivion it's something related to using methods that go against their web-master recommendations. It might maybe not function as cas...
My site slipped from place to nowhere. Google tech people responded to my mail telling me-i should have concealed text or used some kind of 'illegal strategy'! Why don't they simply admit it's their mistake?
It is a typical response, nothing else. I would imagine that 9 times out of ten when Google get an email about a site that's dropped in-to oblivion it's something to do with using methods that go against their webmaster recommendations. It may not be the case with you but from their perspective I ought to think it a fair response in-the circumstances.
There is apparently some confusion about 'charge'
A 'punishment' is put on web sites using techniques and sneaky stuff to enhance their ranks in Google. Clicking google penguin recovery certainly provides suggestions you could give to your dad. A great recent example could be BMW have been using another for the web visitor and one page for the search engines. Because this is despite Google's recommendations, BMW were taken off the list entirely -- they were penalised (http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/ramping-up-on-international-webspam/).
A different type of 'penalty' though it really is a purely a protocol filter, can be a web-master using things like hidden text or keyword-stuffing, for example. That gets strongly strained (assuming the site isn't taken from the list) by the application of the filter( s) which in turn causes the site to drop down the search engine rankings. It might seem such as a penalty but it's the result of selection, not penalty. Identify further on learn about panda penalty recovery by visiting our dynamite article directory.
Charge is different from 'ignoring' links
When links are ignored, there's no punishment being utilized, the links basically do not count. The site itself isn't penalised, it is merely the case that a few of the links in-to that site are not measured. This measure not just filters out link farms and junk