__/ [ Phil Payne ] on Wednesday 09 August 2006 12:10 \__
>> This could be a coincidence. Your conclusion is based on a
>> statistically-invalid case.
>
> Hence my "furtlingly trivial" opening.
True. I missed that one *smile*.
> Everything is statistically valid until it's misused, which I accept in
> this case is likely to be the norm.
True. But too much lenient statistics lead to "damn lies".
Was it Stalin who said that?
> With all of the search engines, indexing is an unpredictable process -
> days are wonderful, weeks are normal, and months are frustrating.
> Every now and then, the usuall months' delay has to be compensated by a
> quickie.
>
> It's neat to see such a rapid response. It's irritating that I get
> this on a hobby site and not on a business one.
A nicer model for the Internet would involve pinging
everything. There were some talks last year about submitting
our Web pages directly to search engines (notably Google)
rather than publish them independently. it saves traffic and
makes updates quicker. This make you want to take a shower.
*smile, shivirs* The private Web, with no neutrality?
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: sheep outnumber people in NZ
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 1036184k total, 400904k used, 635280k free, 51552k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
