Why WPW Should Not Discuss Google Toolbar PR Anymore

[ctabuk]

If the topic is moved to the breakroom, it will be moved back here.

[greeneagle]

It seems as though that we are debating the topic around how "real", "real time" data is, and how effective it is to act upon it.

As marketers we have certain tools available that are slices of the "holy grail" (real time data) that we have never had access to before.

Even when I check most of the stats for the Sites I manage, most of the time they are yesterday's info, so from one perspective, they are "historical".

However, they are close enough to "real time" data to effectively act upon.

Even 2, 3, 4 week or 2 month old data, are better in most cases than what "marketers" had to work from before digital tools walked over our horizon. They also maintain their respective "windows" into "relativity" - IMO.

Ken

[crankydave]

It seems as though that we are debating the topic around how "real", "real time" data is, and how effective it is to act upon it.

As marketers we have certain tools available that are slices of the "holy grail" (real time data) that we have never had access to before.

Even when I check most of the stats for the Sites I manage, most of the time they are yesterday's info, so from one perspective, they are "historical".

However, they are close enough to "real time" data to effectively act upon.

Even 2, 3, 4 week or 2 month old data, are better in most cases than what "marketers" had to work from before digital tools walked over our horizon. They also have their "window" into "relativity".

Ken

Only to a point Ken.

It's more about the validity and usefulness of the data than anything else.

PR is computated by using corrupted data. Not only is the toolbar indication of PR "outdated" slightly, but the data used to compute it outdated, in many instances grossly.

Additionally, the "votes" used to tally PR are placed with self promotion being the prime motivating factor. This unto itself, makes PR a measure of webmasters and not Google.

A single link from a PR8 page can get you a PR7, a link easily bought. That PR7 is simply not Google's measure of importance. That PR7 is a worthless measure of the ability to buy a link in this particular instance that tells you nothing about the importance of that particular site.

Furthmore, it remains my opinion that PR is nothing more than the by product of linking. The URL passes PR regardless of text. If a site were to use URL only links, they would have PR, BUT that PR is no way an indication of the importance of that site or page and is in no way any indication of the importance of the content that is contained upon the page.

Dave

[incrediblehelp]

Well said Dave.

[kgun]

I am really starting to cringe at all these Google Toolbar PR threads that happen at WPW.

As mods, you guys can all move/merge threads as needed. Additioinally, non-mods have the ability to use the report post feature and suggest a thread be moved merged if they find one they feel is out of place.

Everyday more and more threads are being posted here everyday on Google Toolbar PR rising or failing. Google Toolbar PR mattering or not mattering. Who cares? Seriously?

Apparently, lots of people care if there are so many threads popping up about it. If we have 50 threads on Toolbar PR mattering or not, perhaps they need to be merged?

If WPW is ever going to legitimize itself in the world of SEM and SEO these types of threads need to stop.

Wow, yeah, the first thing that pops in my head every morning and what I worry myself to sleep with every night is 'legitimizing' WPW. Even if it were indeed a fact that the discussion of toolbar (or anything else) wasn't what the 'cool' kids in SEO were talking about, it certainly doesn't mean that the community here isn't interested in the subject.

I have not, and do not intend to start, telling people they can't or shouldn't post about Google Toolbar in a forum that discusses Google and search engines. How much sense would that make exactly?

OK lets be sensible, you cant ban these talks. Lots of times when Google Toolbar PR comes up it is slightly interesting, but not of late that is for sure. The honest question here and there by newbie's are going to happen every day and we should be here to field these questions properly or point them to the right thread explaining why Google Toolbar PR doesn't matter. But when we have long time posters asking about Google Toolbar PR updates, Google Toolbar PR values going up and down and how this relates to rankings, I shed a little tear for WPW credibility.

So, let me make sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you actually suggesting that if I have a WPW member who has been attending this forum for the past 4 years, and they ask a question about Google Toolbar PR or, hell, the meta keywords tag... that is somehow something WPW (or I) should be ashamed of?

I don't think so.

Google Toolbar PR is garbage and the more that we discuss it here the worse it is for WPW.

I have actually posted many many times what I think about Google Toolbar PR. That is certainly not to say I am going to begrudge someone else a different opinion nor will I belittle or think less of someone's qualifications for asking a question about it in the future.

I really want this place to become a leader in communication and information for SEO, SEM and other topics. One of the great things about WPW and one of the biggest reasons I am here is now, is how open they are with members using links and the posting of information in threads.

You applaud openness and yet your post is advocating we mitigate that very aspect of the community. So we should be open, but selectively open depending on whether or not the 'other SEO people' will approve of the subject matter?

I think not.

Great post by the site admin. I found this excellent article about Pagerank.

[incrediblehelp]

I found this excellent article about Pagerank.

Anyone that thinks PR is calculated by a simplistic formula like this and it is made public for everyone to know shouldn't be in online marketing and dealing with clients.

[SteveGerencser]

So how does it work if that article (which is based on the patent) is incorrect??

[incrediblehelp]

well I doubt anybody that doesnt work at Google knows for sure. That is why that article is pretty funny.

[kgun]

Anyone that thinks PR is calculated by a simplistic formula like this and it is made public for everyone to know shouldn't be in online marketing and dealing with clients.

I am not in online marketing and dealing with clients. But I have just ordered ad-university.com :-)

Have you read the article? May be a better place to search is the Stanford University search page.

Here is a related link where the assumed nonlinear (logaritmic) scale is explained in greater detail.

Do you know something that I do not know or what do you base your arguments on? Answer that question, please.

But I agree with you, that PR is (most probably) not computed by that simplistic formula and that only some people inside Google knows the exact forumla in august 2006. Trust factors may be incorporated into the formula by using AI.

[williamc]

I found this excellent article about Pagerank.

Anyone that thinks PR is calculated by a simplistic formula like this and it is made public for everyone to know shouldn't be in online marketing and dealing with clients.

Maybe you fail to realize that google does not own the PageRank algo?