Dr. Paula E. Burch wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> After continuous use of the browser, it tends to become less verbose,
>> especially if you tick some boxes and hit some 'get out of my way'
>> buttons. It is worth having a status icon somewhere in the window. It at
>> least reflects on the state of the page, which is important if you use
>> your browser not as an errant tourist on the Net, but as a Web developer.
> Do you mean as in the PR indicator in the Google,toolbar?
> Funny thing, I have not found greyed out PRs for my pages or the ones
> on your site that you said were greyed out (though they might have gone
> back to normal before you checked). Maybe there's something different
> about the Mac OSX version of Google Toolbar, as compared to the version
> you use?
No, it can't be. PageRank gets reported in some abscure form (an image, not
a number, which makes it harder for programmers to exploit it) by the
server. The interfaces all reach the same data, no matter if you use the
PRGooglebar, the Googlebar project, the Google Toolbar, the Perl interfaces
to PageRank or SearchStatus. The datacentres may vary though so checking in
America at one given time can be different from a simultaneous check in
Australia, for example.
>> ...xpi's are harmless, at least after the recent browser fixes that
>> prevent chrome permissions.
> Thanks. That is reassuring.
>> I'm glad to hear that you pin-pointed the culprit. You can now have the
>> solace that it is a matter of time until traffic reverts to its older
> Yes. It's been slowly but steadily improving in yourcache.com, from
> 509-552 before I removed the links to 538-581 yesterday. About 400 to
> go to get back to pre-referer.org levels, but I will be happy when just
> a handful of main entry pages show up again. This morning's
> yourcache.com numbers are odd: it tells me I have -1 entries in each of
> the Google indexes. Fortunately, this appears not to reflect reality.
-1 is usuaully just an indicator of error, N/A or the like. Consider it to
be a temporary issue.
>> Changes, in particular when done in /batch mode/, are always risky and
>> are worth considering twice, three times or even asking the groups. They
>> can easily sway you off the point of equilibrium and it's rarely worth
>> it. I am saying this because I made several such mistakes in the past as
>> I can operate upon hundreds or thousands of my pages in a matter of
>> minutes. It's a win-all or lose-all situation.
> Lesson learned.
>> Remember: search engines hate unhelpful content, aggresive sites, spying
>> on users/engines and browser/O/S discrimination.
> So do I! I thought this would never happen to me! :-)
We sometimes fail to grasp all the different angles that changes have. It's
always worth investigating. Web development is not about mass-production of
pages. It helps if one studies, discusses and learns the trends from the
statistics. Some of my successful stategies were an indirect outcome of
something I heard, read about, asked about, or sat and pondered about in a
variety of boring places. A 300-page book can be written within weeks and
reach an audience of 2 people. A well-thought-through book might take years
to write; then it reaches millions.
Hope it helps,
Roy S. Schestowitz