This article doesn't give any specifics on the "shadow-banning." I am totally willing to believe in any douchebaggery anyone reports from Google, but I (as anyone should) require specifics to give any credence to the writer's claims.
This "article" fails to answer the first questions you'd have. For example, how did Google single you out for this invitation? The article asserts that it was all "shadow-banned" site owners, but then says the Google employee denied all shadow-banning. So how was the invitation phrased?
I'm not even going to waste time breaking down the rest of the empty bullshit in this article. It's unfortunate, because I'll bet every claim made against Google is true. But I'm not going to give a single one credence without specifics. If you're too lazy to provide those, you don't deserve support.
From a quick search it seems you get invited to these things by filling in a feedback form for Google.
As for shadowbanning, well, it doesn't take much to remember Google is a search platform and then to match that with his complaints about his site getting deranked.
Maybe that could have been made clearer, but surely if I could figure that out you could too.
Nobody should be expected to run around doing searches to support the assertions in a random article. Why would you serve as an unpaid tool?
Anybody on here can speculate as to what Google does to this or that Web site; but if you're going to write an article claiming it as fact, you need to support it.
Your time seems to be free as well as engaging to demand "proof" wastes as much time. But yours is way more wasted as you created only a HN comment, not a proper blog article.
This "article" fails to answer the first questions you'd have. For example, how did Google single you out for this invitation? The article asserts that it was all "shadow-banned" site owners, but then says the Google employee denied all shadow-banning. So how was the invitation phrased?
I'm not even going to waste time breaking down the rest of the empty bullshit in this article. It's unfortunate, because I'll bet every claim made against Google is true. But I'm not going to give a single one credence without specifics. If you're too lazy to provide those, you don't deserve support.