Asking google to cache a pet?

[astrid420]

As a lot of you know, you can "ask" google to cache a pet for you. You submit a link and within hours it will crawl the page and make a cache for you. Just put the pet lookup and the petpage, and bam. Instant cache. I've done this several times myself, and the cache was always added within hours of submitting the request. But my question is: Why doesn't everyone do this? Are there risks to this? Is it somehow less reliable than letting the pet sit and cache on its own? I know there are guides about how to make pets cache faster, so I'm wondering about the risks of cache request vs. "natural" cache.

Myself, I never had any trouble with the cache request. But I assume there's a reason people don't do it more often. Any stories/advice?

[parakeet]

Yes, there are risks. Pets cached this way always have double images so they're easy to spot. If you cache a username, there is a probability Google will cache your pets with double lookups too, and you'll have to wait for it to recache anyway.

[Doll]

If you read @(you need an account to see links) 's guide (you need an account to see links), it's explained that a double image can happen when you "force cache" things via google.

[cibomatto]

I have asked googled, and my pets ended up with double cache :I
So I would strongly dis-recommend this method (except for userlookups and petpages)

the refrsher method is quite good!

you can also ask trusted friends or nice members from cK here to help you refresh!

edit:

ohh i didn't not know about the userlookup thing too *--* !!
i guess it is best to stay off google tool.

if you stay off the boards and be patient enough, you will likely to be fine

[astrid420]

If you read @(you need an account to see links) 's guide (you need an account to see links), it's explained that a double image can happen when you "force cache" things via google.

I never knew that. Looks like I got lucky. The double image thing never happened to me, thankfully.

[boomer]

Sometimes it takes a week to cache, sometimes it takes more than 3 (I'm still waiting on some). I guess it depends on how active the page is and the timing of the Google bots that crawl around the internet. I've been lazy about adding some words to the petlookup every other day or so but it helps if it's updated often.

I asked Google to cache a userlookup once and it did cache the pet too with a double image and I had to wait around 2 weeks for it to re-cache properly PC does know that the double image is suspicious so it's best to avoid that altogether. You can also ask Google to remove a cache if that happens to you and just have it cache again from scratch.

[astrid420]

Sometimes it takes a week to cache, sometimes it takes more than 3 (I'm still waiting on some). I guess it depends on how active the page is and the timing of the Google bots that crawl around the internet. I've been lazy about adding some words to the petlookup every other day or so but it helps if it's updated often.

I asked Google to cache a userlookup once and it did cache the pet too with a double image and I had to wait around 2 weeks for it to re-cache properly PC does know that the double image is suspicious so it's best to avoid that altogether. You can also ask Google to remove a cache if that happens to you and just have it cache again from scratch.

Does the double image correct itself in time? Like, the next time google crawls the page you'll be fine, right?

A while ago I had a pet that was taking FOREVER to cache. I would add words every day, refresh, the whole 9 yards. So I gave up and asked google to do it. I wasn't aware of the problems at the time. But it appears to be 100% normal, so I assume if I got a double image it worked it self out on its own!

[boomer]

Yeah I had a double image fix itself, took a while but I guess not much longer than a cache from nothing.

It just made me more nervous having a double cache than no cache at all, because with no cache you could just say it wasn't active but a double cache means someone tried.