What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Much Are You Over-Paying For Your Auto Insurance view!
howlifeworks.com - Car insurance rates have dropped leaving many people paying far more than they need to...
6 Comments
- firebugm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree with you JFJ. I use to just assume that they paid humans to look through the results and see which sites are valid and which are a waste of a domain. I guess that would be a very expensive process though. Over the past year or two, I have come to my own conclusion on the topic. There needs to be a way that you can pay for the opportunity to rank higher.
No, I am not talking about paying big bucks for a guaranteed top ten position. I just mean there should be like some kind of committee made up of honest people who hate seeing the wrong sites have a high ranking. You could pay these places a small fee... maybe $5 per year just to look at your site and determine its worth. Sites that seem to be dedicated to spam or getting you to click on google adwords or are full of false advertising could get a low rating. Sites that are easy to navigate and full of fresh relevant content would get a high rating. And sites that aren't quite there, look about like a hundred other sites out there, are difficult to navigate, have a lot of grammar mistakes, etc... could get a medium rating. For that $5, someone could be sent to surf your site for 5-10 minutes at a time, about four times a year.
After the bad sites have been weeded out (or at least placed lower in the results) then the regular algorithms could take over and place what's left in the appropriate spot.
Something like that would not only create better search results, it could also open up quite a few more jobs in the world. - Two very positive things. ... I wish I could start up something like that. - dmacham, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What if you add a place where you could personally rank a web site on the tool bar? This could be used to alert the people who favor the web sites to what being looked at. This will give the end user a say to what gets a good ranking or a bad ranking.
- jfj3rd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how Google changes over the next few years. Algorithm based search results will continue to be problematic because there will always be those who try to beat the system. Implementing some sort of human editorial opinion into the ranking process seems inevitable."
I love when my predictions are reinforced. Isn't ironic how it would appear that everything desired was for a complete automated system only to come to realize that human editing needs to not just be a small role but a rather large role instead.
This article made my day!
John F. Jones III - vigirl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It is always a pleasure to be able to have more information to show clients that is is content and make that quality content that will work for them, and to stop trying to trick the search engine spiders.
- jicheng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It is great to find what Google is doing, especially for a Chinese reader.
- globalchinese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0eBusiness is a game that is 99% about communication and only 1% about technology!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is