Sasquatch - 5:35 pm on Sep 27, 2002 (gmt 0)

I am wondering if there are several sets of new criteria. Is it possible that certain sites (i.e. the serp giants) have a set of standards and criteria. Then as mentioned in the above thread (which has affected most of us here) the medium-large sites have a set of different standards. Then the smaller sites yet a criteria/standard on there own. I realize this sounds absurd, but think about it. The serps are going to hold thier weight for certain criteria depending on the magnitude of the sight. Could be a filter or algo that examines a sight (theme, pr, pop, etc.), and the sight is given a set of standards to be judged on based on which "cateragory" the sight falls into. For the medium to large sites, it may not have as much to do the quantity of inbounds, but perhaps the desc., anchor, or quality..

It seems to me that just a few minor tweeks to the algo can have the same affect. For example, the google bombing with "go to hell" could be handled fairly well by changing the term

link_text

in the algo to

(link_text * (linking_site_PR / 6))

In addition to the normal place for the linking site PR to be considered, they decide to modify the link text specificly by that, discounting any sites < PR6 and promoting link text from sites > PR6.

Now if they change those PR numbers to the voting value of the different PR levels, it would make the text in the links of a PR4 site to be worth effectively 1 and the link text from a PR8 site would suddenly be worth almost as much as most of the other factors combined.

BTW, I am not saying that that is what they did.

Little tweaks can do a lot.