Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Google is weird.

  • Subject: Re: Google is weird.
  • From: Davemon <nospam@nowhere.no>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:42:49 +0100
  • In-reply-to: <d9t8a8$1sj5$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk>
  • Newsgroups: alt.internet.search-engines
  • Organization: datanet.co.uk
  • References: <253b7$42c12200$504427df$4451@datanet.co.uk> <06d2c1lifss0op320si37040h0ps15l500@4ax.com> <2cf20$42c1424b$504427df$14254@datanet.co.uk> <d9rjoj$1ef0$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <77b99$42c1933b$504427df$7123@datanet.co.uk> <d9t8a8$1sj5$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk>
  • User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk alt.internet.search-engines:62579
Roy Schestowitz wrote:
Davemon wrote:

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

Davemon wrote:

Big Bill wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:10:07 +0100, Davemon <nospam@nowhere.no> wrote:

Can anyone tell me why my site (http://www.nightsoil.co.uk) is at #2 in
google? for the search: E-commerce Prototype

What "made Google thought it should go there" is the coincidence in
combining the words "E-commerce" and "prototype".

It's no more a coincidence than the order of the words in this sentance! Often software is developed through prototypes, then beta versions before a final release, so an "Ecommerce Prototype" would relate to a stage of development of an Ecommerce website.

That site does not have

many words in it, so the density of these words is high and the title in
particular hits the key words.

That makes sence to me, thank you.

What is the relevance of the phrase "E-commerce prototype" anyway? I am
not being sarcastic, but I try to think from the point-of-view of a
Google user. Will someone have particular interest in so-called
E-commerce prototypes? Sounds a little fluffy to me.

I understand the point you're making, but as I said before, I'm interested in why google ranks my site at #2 for that phrase, I'm *not* trying to generate traffic though that page, so it's not relevant to me whether it's a 'fluffy' phrase or whether people search for it or not (unless Google behaves differently because of that).

As for your later question, Google optimise (manually) the more
frequently searched-for phrases. They need to divide their time and
labour capacity to assist most of their users and weed out spammers and
irrelevancies where it matters the most.

Ok, so (unlike Big Bill) you believe that Google behaves differently for popular search phrases then? Thats interesting. Do you have any idea what kind of thresholds that google have with regards search-frequency and manual-optimisation?

Google keep me in the dark, very much as they do with the rest of us. From
what I have heard/read, Google pay a branch of their staff $10-20 per hour
to sit and search the Web, identifying spam sites and scrapers in the
process. There is also the "Dissatisfied with the results? Tell us" feature
at the bottom and I assume it plays a role.

Lots of searches still come up with 'spam sites' and 'scrapers', tho'. Do Google advertise these jobs? Do we know they exist?

There were rumours that Google's placement of sites is somehow affected
(i.e. becomes more lenient) when Google AdSense sites -- affiliates that is
-- are involved. I do not believe this is so.

Makes sence though, but it seems like the kind of thing someone who is trying to sell AdSense and Seo services would say.

In any case, I imagine that common search phrases have some results
handpicked, while others are ordered naturally, as suggested by the
algorithm. I must say that I am often impressed by the 'correctness', if
one may call it that, of the impact factor taking account in the results.

I read somewhere that a studies had been done, where top level librarians placed websites in order of relevance to a subject and the correlation to Googles results was nearly 90% or something incredibly high like that.

Perhaps you ought to use the 'dissatisfied' widget if the results bother

Hmm, good point. However, Google aren't paying me to improve their service, so I don't think I will!


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index