Msg#: 4609492 posted 10:45 am on Sep 13, 2013 (gmt 0)
I read on here once that Cutts said we wouldn't be able to backwards engineer the algo anymore? A slight randomise effect would certainly make that impossible....
In programming and organising results from a database this is very easy to achieve, even just “slight” randomising effect and a slight shuffle. Since P2 im seeing movement all the time, sites just swapping 1-3 positions up and down, every update they re-shuffle (sites that aren't directories and glued into the serps I mean).
I’m starting to wonder if google runs a mini "randomise" effect every couple of weeks? It would make sense of the constant reshuffle I see anyway?
Although there is a bit of shuffling from week to week, and even day to day, I tend to see the same couple top results all the time in our niche, and even sometimes in the third and fourth position. Below that it tends to shuffle more.
I read on here once that Cutts said we wouldn't be able to backwards engineer the algo anymore?
When were we really -- really -- able to? Oh, we new this was important and that thing over there counted somewhat, but to actually think that one could actually reverse engineer the algo? In my opinion total hubris.
Ooh, maybe we can introduce a myRANK (tm) metric and sell a bunch of reports and such based on it!
Anyway, as different SERPs are served to different users in different areas at different times of day in different sizes and flavors Google really wouldn't have to introduce a randomize effect because in effect, well, they already are.