https://plus.google.com/115106448444522478339/posts/SxYcq9QHFB2

In general, I am a fan of rel=author markup and schema markups that allow a webmaster to customize their search results. The benefit of having a search result that stands out from the rest on the page can impact conversions and click-throughs for the positive.

However, you present some interesting ideas that are a great word of caution. I would argue that most of the worst-case scenario ideas presented are unlikely to come true. You are right that there is a possibility and that possibility may be enough to stop some from utilizing the feature.

I would bet that Google would reframe from going to such extremes because the search community would find out and then would simply stop utilizing features like a rel=author tag. This may mean some major short term losses for those that heavily bought into rel=author, but in general the search world would move on and find the next best thing. I would argue that Google would much prefer to have the data and manipulate it for their gain, than they would attack SEOs with the data.

At work I distribute content for the search marketing company I’m employed by, and one of these pieces got automagically assigned to me even though I used no author mark-up on the content – just like the many other pieces I get published every week on behalf of our clients.

It was highly frustrating and made me think I’d just remove myself from Google+ and their schemes.

There’s some sites too where I’d probably prefer not to display my authorship!

We’ve only been using it actively since the end of October this year, and a lot of our titles are long tail. So, take that for what it’s worth.

My rankings dropped with an average of 8 or 9 positions.

But, my main question is off course: Did you manage to get the website back to top positions? And if yes; How!?