This is New - SEO's please comment

[ctabuk]

Google Outsourcing Their Search Algo.....To You! : SEO Book.com


Open to abuse, or will ISP's be traced and penalised?

[chandrika]

I saw the options to do this appear in search results today and it immediately sent shivers down my spine, as it reminds me of ebays feedback system.

There is the option to leave a comment about a site and make it public, so although it says in that blog "These changes will only appear in your Google account, and won't influence the result sets as seen by others. " I am guessing the public comments will become visible.

[sofomor]

IMHO

Google means quality. They won't try any thing which "may be" prone to get abused by competitors or undermines their search quality.

I take this news as ripples, and not shock waves.

Cheers

[kevsta]

i cant see them letting people write about other people's sites publicly.

too big a can of worms, this will be for the specific google account only am sure

[adtastichosting]

Originally Posted by kevsta

i cant see them letting people write about other people's sites publicly.

too big a can of worms, this will be for the specific google account only am sure

I would certainly hope so because otherwise this would open up the door for alot of abuse and manipulation of rankings.

[incrediblehelp]

If they use it on public SERP's then people will SPAM. If they anywhere near an avid searcher their results can quickly get crammed with “searching bookmarks” so to speak. How does that benefit them? They will lose all fresh content listings with preferred ones and the rest of the space taken up by Universal search.

[ami_iss]

That would make it a bit like the old Zeal directory (RIP) - Zeal - where people rated Web sites - that was used by various search engines. Do we know how those data were used?

Yes it would open it to abuse if they did that, but if a huge majority of people said a page did not deserve top ranking for a keyword, maybe they could use that as a flag to check it manually - - and then decide if it is really spam or junk. They could also discount raters who are consistent abusers if they want to go that route and they could use the cumulative ratings for all pages on a site as an overall rank.

But it seems they are going in the opposite direction with personalized search - give each person what they want to see. Republicans get "Bush is a genius" Democrats get "Bush is a Bum" - whatever.

I don't know if I like personalized search. I think the world is a generally a better place if you can see what other people think, rather than re-arranging the results so they support your preconceptions. Tell me something I don't know, rather than something I know. I can sort out the good from the bad, but I ought to see all of it.

<snip Please add your link to your signature CD>

[SemAdvance]

I would be more worried that wanna be SEOs are going to use it to manipulate results and use screenshots to trick unsuspecting webmasters into thinking they were able to obtain the results, when in fact they are simply reordered...

Google also says its doing this to allow those who search the web frequently an easier way to find sites they use but whats wrong with the browser bookmark tools?

What I think I'll have done is reorder the results to put my affiliate sites at the top, and then have someone use a hack to set my pages as the preferred browser home page.

Sweet$$$

[chowell]

Sounds like a decent way to keep track of your search results... how often do you forget to bookmark a site that you stumbled on during your search before reaching the best site? Certainly, some of those other sites you saw had value and could be useful down the road.

I don't see this being manipulated for SEO (yet), since it appears that everything is "within your own Google account". If they allow the ratings and/or the number of bookmarks to influence the rankings, you know that will be exploited ASAP by auto-account setup scripts, etc.

Google isn't dumb enough to get into that again are they?

[google junky]

I see it being a new play toy for Google users for now.

It is always possible that they will test other ideas later on down the road for what it could be used for. Every good idea has to have a base to work off of. This might not be any different. It definitely won't be allowed to have any impact on search results as of now. There would be no way for Google to be even close to prepared for what would happen if it was used to rank sites.

Could you imagine if comments where allowed on ranked site? lol
I think all you have to do is see a few comments for videos on YouTube. It can be the coolest video in the world and you will still have a bunch of teenyboppers saying something dumb about it.

[Clint1]

Originally Posted by sofomor

IMHO

Google means quality. They won't try any thing which "may be" prone to get abused by competitors or undermines their search quality.

You simply cannot be serious, I hope you're being sarcastic. Everyone on this thread has pointed out valid reasons, all to which I agree. G has nothing to do with quality, it's all money. They have a long history of "products" that ruined the internet and millions of websites due to their abuse. PageRank for one example; where they couldn't care less about quality nor content, only who links to the page, which has been abused since day one which caused the spawn of billions of bogus useless webpages and websites, all which did well over that of the hard working legit site owners' websites only because not enough people had the need to link to them. PR; which by G's own admission and statement that it's "the measure of a quality and usefulness of a website".

Then there is Gmail, a heaven-sent product for cyber-terrorists and spammers with endless storage space--where nefarious scumbags can create an infinite number of email accounts to engage in various forms of harassment and cyber-terrorism with totally impunity (without ever having to give valid contact info) ; thanks to G's total ignorance of their very own "window dressing" TOS which states to the contrary.

This is just yet another Pandora's Box of abuse where your competitors can destroy your business....and, I'm not surprised coming from them.

[deepsand]

Dear Google,

It's hard being in charge, having to be the responsible grown-up all of the time; we all have at some time or another wished we could throw off such burdens, to be free to act as we like without concern for the consequences. But, think of the consequences of shirking ones responsibilities we must.

Children making family decisions? Inmates running the prisons? The insane running the asylums? I believe that we can agree that none of these are viable alternatives.

Why, then, should users of your search engine be allowed to determine the relative worth of any on-line resource. Is your next door neighbor really qualified to make such judgements outside the confines of their own home and personal life? Let's be frank here; is it not in fact the truth that many are not even wholly competent in that limited regard?

The Founding Fathers of our Nation recognized that equality does not exist in all regards, that ignorance and passion frequently run roughshod over reason, and therefore that tyrannies of the masses must be avoided to the greatest possible extent.

Should we here and now act in a manner any less the wise?

Let us pray that your answer is "no."

Most Sincerely,

Your Concerned Audience

[Webnauts]

Deepsand, I gave you an approved rep point with:
"The best post ever!"

[Daniel L.]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Why, then, should users of your search engine be allowed to determine the relative worth of any on-line resource.

Simply put, as others here have pointed out, abuse. Anyone that thinks that everyone can be trusted to use a product for good and only good, is really being naive. PR proved that.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by Daniel L.

Anyone that thinks that everyone can be trusted to use a product for good and only good, is really being naive. PR proved that.

About the PR, I have a very strong feeling, that within the next 4-5 months, it will improve dramatically.

Stay tuned.

[Daniel L.]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

About the PR, I have a very strong feeling, that within the next 4-5 months, it will improve dramatically.
Stay tuned.

I certainly hope you're right, but that unfortunately wouldn't undo all the years of damage.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Deepsand, I gave you an approved rep point with:
"The best post ever!"

[deepsand]

To the person who Negatively rated my post at This is New - SEO's please comment , with the comment "only in an ideal perfect world, and we do NOT live in one," I confess to being at a complete loss as to your meaning.

What in my post suggested that I even believed a utopia to be possible, let alone extant?

In fact, how is the subject of utopias even relevant to the matter at hand?

[ctabuk]

Well I have joined webnauts and added a point. Excellent posting.

So, will it trace ISP's after all if Chrome was a flop, they have to install spyware somewhere else.

[datetopia]

Google is trying to build something big. It has to do with:
- Android - google os for mobiles with regular web browser - there are much more people with mobiles than people with computers connected to the internet
- google Chrome - the google browser heavily advertised on youtube - Try YouTube in a new web browser! Download Google Chrome; IE beware of Firefox .. Firefox beware of Chrome - mainly for the masses
- Gmail - the free google mail with free gigs of storage space - login there and you're also logged into other google services... like:
- SearchWiki - search results ordered by user ratings - this has the chance of being more popular and widely accepted than Web History - the google service to spy yourself (why??!)

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Well I have joined webnauts and added a point. Excellent posting..

I'm glad that you both understood and appreciated what was being said.

Originally Posted by ctabuk

So, will it trace ISP's after all if Chrome was a flop, they have to install spyware somewhere else.

It is not clear to me how Google could acquire any additional data re. ISPs via this method over and above that which they already possess the means for gathering.

Am I overlooking something here?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by datetopia

Google is trying to build something big. It has to do with:
- Android - google os for mobiles with regular web browser - there are much more people with mobiles than people with computers connected to the internet
- google Chrome - the google browser heavily advertised on youtube - Try YouTube in a new web browser! Download Google Chrome; IE beware of Firefox .. Firefox beware of Chrome - mainly for the masses
- Gmail - the free google mail with free gigs of storage space - login there and you're also logged into other google services... like:
- SearchWiki - search results ordered by user ratings - this has the chance of being more popular and widely accepted than Web History - the google service to spy yourself (why??!)

And, the luster seems to have worn off of Chrome, with its market share continuing to slide. Not to be deterred, though, Google Considers Preinstalling Chrome On New PCs - PC World

[ctabuk]

Originally Posted by deepsand

I'm glad that you both understood and appreciated what was being said.


It is not clear to me how Google could acquire any additional data re. ISPs via this method over and above that which they already possess the means for gathering.

Am I overlooking something here?

Deepsand, you are probably perfectly correct. It is just that Google does nothing, without it having 'an angle'

[kgun]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Open to abuse, or will ISP's be traced and penalised?

Everything that can be manually influenced can be manipulated.

<cite>
Dupont was noncommittal about whether the company planned to build in that feedback loop, either directly as a signal to influence search rankings or indirectly as extra data that could help the company judge the relevance of its search results. But he certainly didn't rule the idea out. We don't close any doors.
</cite>

Having a background in Bayesian filtering, I see how such an adaptive addon can be valuable for the surfer.

Originally Posted by SemAdvance

Google also says its doing this to allow those who search the web frequently an easier way to find sites they use but whats wrong with the browser bookmark tools?

There is nothing wrong with your browser bookmarks. This only add functionality to your web surfing.

<cite>
"Is this a sign Google are looking for other signals of quality? Do too many people know about the influence of inbound linking these days? Quick, vote down Wikipedia! Curiously, Wikipedia's seo page already has 4 negative votes".
</cite>
I have had hard discussions with my son, a student of Law at the University of Bergen, Norway. He is a Wikipedia fan. I am more "agnostic". Sometimes Wikipedia results are good as a first fast solution, but personally I have the impression that too often Wikipedia get a top position on Google, because so many link to Wikipedia articles.

Originally Posted by chowell

Sounds like a decent way to keep track of your search results... how often do you forget to bookmark a site that you stumbled on during your search before reaching the best site? Certainly, some of those other sites you saw had value and could be useful down the road.

Yes, the main idea so long.

<cite>
Why would people use it? Well lots of people use Del.icio.us...but this is one better than Del.ici.us...rather than people bookmarking whatever is hot at the moment with tons of different tags people are stating what keywords certain content deserves exposure for.
</cite>
Better than Del.icio.us or different / added functionality?

Originally Posted by chowell

I don't see this being manipulated for SEO (yet), since it appears that everything is "within your own Google account". If they allow the ratings and/or the number of bookmarks to influence the rankings, you know that will be exploited ASAP by auto-account setup scripts, etc.

Google isn't dumb enough to get into that again are they?

Good point, but observe:

<cite>
"Is this a sign Google are looking for other signals of quality? Do too many people know about the influence of inbound linking these days?"
</cite>
At least, it will introduce a new dimension into their search algorithm and as such improve search results as long as there are extra information (orthogonality) in this new dimension.

So this
<cite>
However, it is hard to imagine that Google won't take note of such signals, especially if they see broad patterns emerging, and then feed this data through into their algorithm development.
</cite>

Conclusion:

• I don't see the big SEO implication so far, but as explained above it introduces a new dimension / factor that should be taken into account.
• Finally, isn't everything that improves search results an evolution in SEARCH?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

It is just that Google does nothing, without it having 'an angle'

Of that there should be no doubt.

For the moment, at least, I see this as being an effort to improve what Google views as the "user's experience," with eye toward brand building, by providing increased user personalization. And, given that such provides no empirical data over and above that already available to Google, I do not presently regard it as a candidate for providing input re. rankings.

By analogy, this feature can be viewed as allowing one who rents a furnished apartment to re-arrange the furniture to their own liking, but has no impact on what furniture the apartment owner provides.

Still, given a skepticism born of experience, I cannot wholly discount Google's acting in what I would judge to be an irresponsible manner; hence my open "letter to Google."

[kgun]

If data is centralized, is there time for a new operator (all)in searchWiki?

[leesw]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Dear Google,

It's hard being in charge, having to be the responsible grown-up all of the time; we all have at some time or another wished we could throw off such burdens, to be free to act as we like without concern for the consequences. But, think of the consequences of shirking ones responsibilities we must.

Children making family decisions? Inmates running the prisons? The insane running the asylums? I believe that we can agree that none of these are viable alternatives.

Why, then, should users of your search engine be allowed to determine the relative worth of any on-line resource. Is your next door neighbor really qualified to make such judgements outside the confines of their own home and personal life? Let's be frank here; is it not in fact the truth that many are not even wholly competent in that limited regard?

The Founding Fathers of our Nation recognized that equality does not exist in all regards, that ignorance and passion frequently run roughshod over reason, and therefore that tyrannies of the masses must be avoided to the greatest possible extent.

Should we here and now act in a manner any less the wise?

Let us pray that your answer is "no."

Most Sincerely,

Your Concerned Audience

Hence we have the results of this past election. Ignorance running wild.

[spiderbait]

Originally Posted by leesw

Hence we have the results of this past election. Ignorance running wild.

True, but fortunately reason prevailed and ingorance was shut out.

[A Phoenix SEO]

It should be very interesting to see where this all is headed. The big question will they use what they learn from person search and apply it to the SERP's that everyone sees. I can see where this would be a long term benefit for high quality sites.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by leesw

Hence we have the results of this past election. Ignorance running wild.

[off-topic]
One side? The other? Both?

And, was this election unique in such respect?

In any case, that's why we do not select the Federal Chief Executive by popular vote, but rather by way oo an Electoral College.

[/off-topic]

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by A Phoenix SEO

The big question will they use what they learn from person search and apply it to the SERP's that everyone sees. I can see where this would be a long term benefit for high quality sites.

So, my personal preferences are both relevant & superior to your needs?

[full house]

I think that would be helpful! . . .Can't see anything wrong!

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by full house

I think that would be helpful! . . .Can't see anything wrong!

I repeat the question - "So, my personal preferences are both relevant & superior to your needs?"

[OpticBurst.com]

Sure they are!

[deepsand]

Very well, then, tell me your needs & I'll tell you what you're going to actually get!

[ctabuk]

Would someone mind searching 'Judge George Jeffreys' for me, as on my browser my site is top on Google UK, but that is because I clicked the 'promote upwards'. If it is top, then - wow!

[Clint1]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Would someone mind searching 'Judge George Jeffreys' for me, as on my browser my site is top on Google UK, but that is because I clicked the 'promote upwards'. If it is top, then - wow!

You appear to have some duplicate content.
Judge George Jeffreys New Historical Fiction Books: Just another WordPress weblog
Here in the USA using IE6, that URL is 7th. I don't see the other 2 URL's in your signature file out to the 4th page.

[ctabuk]

Hi Clint, Yup, you can't beat a bit of dup - Thanks for the relative link. Your post flashed up on the admin board. Speed linking at its best!!!

[Clint1]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Hi Clint, Yup, you can't beat a bit of dup - Thanks for the relative link. Your post flashed up on the admin board. Speed linking at its best!!!

The more you create, the better the chances of an SE picking one they like best.

[ctabuk]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Would someone mind searching 'Judge George Jeffreys' for me, as on my browser my site is top on Google UK, but that is because I clicked the 'promote upwards'. If it is top, then - wow!

I'm just giving a free pointer here. What I did was place my anchor text page title in the two 'anchor text' - subsequent posts on these topic will feed the bots with my anchor text and they will flash up on my admin page. OK, I'll get some spam, but the filters are on

Related topic linking from forum posting is called SEM

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Would someone mind searching 'Judge George Jeffreys' for me, as on my browser my site is top on Google UK, but that is because I clicked the 'promote upwards'. If it is top, then - wow!

Don't see your site anywhere David.

Dave

[ctabuk]

Judge George Jeffreys New Historical Fiction Books: Just another ...
Judge George Jeffreys. Posted in October 18th, 2008. Here is Michael Fane before Judge George Jeffreys. Chapter One ‘The Hanging Judge’ ...
Judge George Jeffreys New Historical Fiction Books: Just another WordPress weblog - 29k - Cached - Similar pages -
George Jeffreys, 1st Baron Jeffreys - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
29 Oct 2008 ... George Jeffreys, 1st Baron Jeffreys may also refer to George Darell Jeffreys, 1st Baron Jeffreys (1878–1960). Judge Jeffreys. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Jeffreys,_1st_Baron_Jeffreys - 40k - Cached - Similar pages -
George Jeffreys - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
29 Jan 2008 ... George Jeffreys (composer) (c. 1610 -1685), English organ composer ... as "Lord Jeffreys", "Judge Jeffreys" or "'Hanging' Judge Jeffreys", ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Jeffreys - 18k - Cached - Similar pages -

From Google.com

[crankydave]

A wiki page? Didn't know wiki was your site.

Dave

[ctabuk]

LOL CD - No mate, the one on top of it. While I have your assistance, I'm seeing something weird in my stat searches. My hits from ASK are being redirected to Google results. Has something happened that no one knows about?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

LOL CD - No mate, the one on top of it. While I have your assistance, I'm seeing something weird in my stat searches. My hits from ASK are being redirected to Google results. Has something happened that no one knows about?

#6 on .com #4 on .co.uk

Not aware of anything. What's the URL when you hover the link?

Dave

[ctabuk]

uk.ask.com/web?q=Right to Buy Scheme&qsrc=6&o=41627712&l=dis&siteid=41627712


This one comes up as a google.co.uk then virtually the same code.

Dave, It's an Opera Browser issue, it's doing the same thing on wiki links. I'll reboot it. Cheers david

[Jeffwend]

Here is a good explanation of Search Wiki from one of its engineers, YouTube - Google SearchWiki

It seems to me that this is something that is more for the end users than to influence SERPS

[full house]

good share! sites are designed basically for the users and I think that good.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Clint1

You appear to have some duplicate content.
Judge George Jeffreys New Historical Fiction Books: Just another WordPress weblog
Here in the USA using IE6, that URL is 7th. I don't see the other 2 URL's in your signature file out to the 4th page.

#7 here on google.com

Originally Posted by ctabuk

uk.ask.com/web?q=Right to Buy Scheme&qsrc=6&o=41627712&l=dis&siteid=41627712


This one comes up as a google.co.uk then virtually the same code.

Dave, It's an Opera Browser issue, it's doing the same thing on wiki links. I'll reboot it. Cheers david

My bolding.

What do you mean? I see the same result for that URL in FF, IE and Opera.

[Web Design Company]

Originally Posted by full house

good share! sites are designed basically for the users and I think that good.

That's true. Sites should be targeted at the readers first because building a website only for the SEs won't help if people don't come to it or leave within a few seconds of landing.