Robots.txt: ban everything except the chosen ones, why not?

I have long been thinking about banning every crawler except Ask, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo! from my site.

The rationale for this is that I have never seen any traffic generated by any of the other web crawlers.

My questions:

  • Is there any reason not to?
  • Has anyone done this?
  • Have you noticed any negative consequences?

Update:
So far I have used the blacklist: if I don't like the finder, I add them to the ban list.
However, I am not a fan of blacklists, because this is an endless story: there are always more scanners there.

I don’t really care about real ugly distorting searchers, they are detected and blocked automatically. (and they usually do not request a robots.txt file :)

However, many seekers are by no means mistaken; they simply do not create any value for me / my clients.
There are, for example, several crawlers that use a website that claims to be Google's next; Only better. I have never seen the traffic coming from them, and I am skeptical of them, becoming better than any of the four search engines mentioned above.

2:
, , 100 - (= , ). 52% - .

60% robots.txt, 40% (21% ) robots.txt. ( Ask, Google, Microsoft Yahoo!)

, , , , , , 12% - 17%.

+5
5

- . , , , .

?

, , robots.txt, (), , , , , .

+4

, , - -, , google ., , .

+3

- ?

, -, , , -.

, , , robots.txt.

, . , .

+3

, "". - , "stuff", .

+2

, .

, AltaVista . , , Google. ( bing, Ask, Yahoo , ). , , Altavista, Google , , , .

Pagerank tends to relate to older sites. You do not want to look newer than you because you blocked access through robots.txt for no reason. These guys: http://www.dotnetdotcom.org/ may be completely useless now, but maybe after 5 years the fact that you were not in your index will now count against you in the next big search engine.

+1
source

All Articles