<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Gone AWOL</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/</link>
	<description>Insert witty strapline here</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 12:46:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamin</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-11734</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 03:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-11734</guid>
		<description>I am noticing the exact same problem and just filed a support request with adsense but I&#039;m not to confident that I&#039;ll get a satisfying answer after reading all these comments.  In the past 3 days I&#039;ve received a huge spike in traffic on a particular post from stumbleupon.  MyBlogLog is showing a fairly average CTR but adsense is reporting 10 - 100 times less clicks.  I mean it&#039;s like it&#039;s not even counting any of the clicks that came from this new traffic at all.  My best guess is that their fraud detection algorithm is viewing these as invalid clicks because it was a huge spike in traffic all from one source.  That&#039;s extremely disappointing if that&#039;s the case.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am noticing the exact same problem and just filed a support request with adsense but I&#8217;m not to confident that I&#8217;ll get a satisfying answer after reading all these comments.  In the past 3 days I&#8217;ve received a huge spike in traffic on a particular post from stumbleupon.  MyBlogLog is showing a fairly average CTR but adsense is reporting 10 &#8211; 100 times less clicks.  I mean it&#8217;s like it&#8217;s not even counting any of the clicks that came from this new traffic at all.  My best guess is that their fraud detection algorithm is viewing these as invalid clicks because it was a huge spike in traffic all from one source.  That&#8217;s extremely disappointing if that&#8217;s the case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-6756</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:41:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-6756</guid>
		<description>The question I have with regard to determining fraudulent clicks or not is this...

For all the clicks that google are not counting in my reports, there not paying me for are Google receiving revenue for those clicks themselves?

How would we know one way or another.

The term &quot;Self proclaimed God&quot; springs to mind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question I have with regard to determining fraudulent clicks or not is this&#8230;</p>
<p>For all the clicks that google are not counting in my reports, there not paying me for are Google receiving revenue for those clicks themselves?</p>
<p>How would we know one way or another.</p>
<p>The term &#8220;Self proclaimed God&#8221; springs to mind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Teddie</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-1277</link>
		<dc:creator>Teddie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2007 22:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-1277</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s interesting, because Google claims only less than 10 percent of clicks are bogus, and if it was proven that infact they&#039;d been telling advertisers one figure but penalising publishers with a much higher figure that would be serious fraud, and as we know 1 percentage point difference is worth 100,000,000 Dollars per annum in revenue. Anyway soon they are supposed to open up information about which sites in the network generate clicks so that will be easy to test.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s interesting, because Google claims only less than 10 percent of clicks are bogus, and if it was proven that infact they&#8217;d been telling advertisers one figure but penalising publishers with a much higher figure that would be serious fraud, and as we know 1 percentage point difference is worth 100,000,000 Dollars per annum in revenue. Anyway soon they are supposed to open up information about which sites in the network generate clicks so that will be easy to test.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phillip Winn</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-1235</link>
		<dc:creator>Phillip Winn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-1235</guid>
		<description>If they recorded *all* clicks, advertisers would flip out -- since a decent percentage of all ad clicks are fraudulent. It sound like you&#039;re saying Google is going too far the *other* way, but that seems like it would be hard to prove. You see a click on an ad. Is it &quot;real&quot; or &quot;fraudulent&quot;? How would you know? (How would *they* know?)

They *shouldn&#039;t* be showing *every* click in your AdSense stats, but how they measure fraud and how you measure fraud are obviously different.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If they recorded *all* clicks, advertisers would flip out &#8212; since a decent percentage of all ad clicks are fraudulent. It sound like you&#8217;re saying Google is going too far the *other* way, but that seems like it would be hard to prove. You see a click on an ad. Is it &#8220;real&#8221; or &#8220;fraudulent&#8221;? How would you know? (How would *they* know?)</p>
<p>They *shouldn&#8217;t* be showing *every* click in your AdSense stats, but how they measure fraud and how you measure fraud are obviously different.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dom</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-1226</link>
		<dc:creator>Dom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-1226</guid>
		<description>@Randy: I&#039;m in the UK and so cannot use YPN even if I wanted to.

I think the answer to your question is simply that most publishers would want ALL their clicks recorded properly, regardless of who is serving the ads.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Randy: I&#8217;m in the UK and so cannot use YPN even if I wanted to.</p>
<p>I think the answer to your question is simply that most publishers would want ALL their clicks recorded properly, regardless of who is serving the ads.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy Charles Morin</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-1225</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy Charles Morin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-1225</guid>
		<description>Question. If AdSense makes you more money and YPN counts all your clicks, then do you use AdSense or YPN?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Question. If AdSense makes you more money and YPN counts all your clicks, then do you use AdSense or YPN?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MacBros</title>
		<link>http://domramsey.com/blog/tech/google-gone-awol/comment-page-1/#comment-1219</link>
		<dc:creator>MacBros</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:27:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.domramsey.com/tech/google-gone-awol/#comment-1219</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the link.
I would appreciate it if you update me if you get a response from them.
I would like to know what the heck is up with it also.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the link.<br />
I would appreciate it if you update me if you get a response from them.<br />
I would like to know what the heck is up with it also.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<br />
<b>Fatal error</b>:  Allowed memory size of 134217728 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 16114573 bytes) in <b>/var/www/vhosts/dynamite/domramsey.com/live/htdocs/blog/wp-includes/wp-db.php</b> on line <b>793</b><br />

