Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 38
- Sphinn It!
Went Hot: November 20, 2007 - 4:05 pm
Posted By: AndyBeard 594 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.snoskred.org)
Category: Google Other
For someone who undertakes such hobbies for no personal gain, to help prevent others falling into harms way online to be speaking out against Google in such terms, there has been a huge shift in trust.
9 Comments
Comments
Nice find Andy, good read.
Nicely written and an admirable attitude. And yes, the shift in trust and sympathy is quite tangible all over the place now. And about time, too.
I think the lady echos many of the sentiments that a lot of everyday bloggers are feeling these days.
People like Andy beard have asked all manner of reasonable questions on this topic and all he gets is stonewall.
On the reinclusion thing. Why is it an aspect of reconsideration that you have to admit to some 'wrong doing' like some belly crawling snake? Forgive me my lord, for I have sinned.
Why does Google think that it has a right to shape the Internet to its own commerical whims and needs? What about respect for the people who create the content, the very people who supported them in their infancy?
How is it that such an infintessimally small number of people can provoke such austere actions of defamation and disrespect?
This is 2007 not 2001. Isn't about time that their algo matured to a point whereby the actions of a link reference here there or anywhere else had a lesser impact? Haven't they seriously grabbed enough user behaviour to be able to decide whether link x is of greater value than say link y and just ignore it? How many millions of user actions have been caught and flitered and studied through adsense and analytics? How many link growth patterns, how many natural language filter extrapolations. How many semantic text graph references does it take to differentiate a piece of crap from a piece of not so crap?
Isn't really about time that this multi billion dollar baby grew legs and moved on? WTF are all those PHD's doing there, besides drinking champers and getting fat perhaps?
To many, Google look like a bully, that's a fact. To many others it doesn't. That's a fact too.
If you happen to find yourself in the whitey white club with your unblemished I'm fab cos I love Google and Google loves me and they always will cos Im a good boy and know how to behave myself and lovedy love love the great jolly green google giant in the internet sky, then...whoopeee you, I'm glad that you have such faith and commitment to a company of profit driven individuals. I'm sure they have your best interests at heart too. One day when they move the goalposts again and you find yourself in the dog do do, then all i can say is you'll have my sympathy too, cos change those guidelines they will, that's about the only safe bet you can bet on.
Oh come on now...
"the online advertising world uses Page Rank as a way of judging websites"
I've never use PR as part of my advertising rates nor can I think of anyone putting that in their media kit except as a "me too" sort of thing. They could give a rats ass about a PR 7 site if it doesn't have any traffic.
I understand where you're coming from but I sell direct advertising daily and people never ask the PR question and I don't use it in my marketing. Advertisers want to know HOW MANY RAW VISITORS, PAGE IMPRESSIONS and DEMOGRAPHICS of those visitors.
Actually this manipulation of results goes far beyond search engine optimization and online monetization BECAUSE HE WHO CONTROLS THE FLOW OF INFORMATION CONTROLS THE WORLD!
As more and more people turn to the web for their news source if you can control which websites and what news gets the best and most publicity while denying those whose data you don't like then you can influence what people believe and what they think...think political manipulation!
Remember the Google Scandal where they manipulated post -Katrina images by replacing them with pre-Katrina images...why? Trying to make someone look good in a severely mishandled case?
Google manually arrested the meteoric ascent of my "Princess Diana" blog (http://princess-diana-life-n-death.blogspot.com) which largely stipulated that she was killed in a conspiracy for the sole reason the 10th year Anniversary of her death was on the horizon AND my stance was contradictory to the official line (Aug 31st) and the blog was rising too fast d through whiter than Michael Jackson SEO methods and a ton of original content (articles written by me).
My blog debuted on the Google SERPs at position 521 on Aug 11th and 2 days later was at 221...this was a blog whose 1st post was on June 22nd.
Sphunn..not because I agree with what Snoskred wrote. But just to make it clear how discussions of drop in PageRank and making money by selling paid links have develped to discussions of 9/11, terrorism, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as modifications of Niemoller's poem.
That's ok - you don't have to agree. We are all entitled to our own opinion.
The current situation raises questions about our online world and who we want to be in control of it. Do we want a company of 13,000+ employees deciding who can be found online and who can't, for whatever reasons of their own - or do we want a real search engine which accurately displays the state of the web for better or worse?
SEOs are scum and Google is a terrorist. Yeah, let's just blog all year long about which way the toolbar is moving and how Google eats babies for breakfast.
"or do we want a real search engine which accurately displays the state of the web for better or worse?"
Several choices already exist so obviously you don't consider any of them a "real" search engine since you don't rank so well, new job in the horizon?