walkman - 11:58 am on Jun 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

>I really like the human-reviewer angle. Google could > hire a lot of cheap brains by using college kids.

do you want to trust your livelyhood to a college kid who might have a bias, or be in a bad mood? What if he /she clicks on th ewrong checkbox?

as far as I understand this (after GG explained it):
this is not to penalize site A or B. It is to test the serps if they're better or worse after updates. The .doc file is to guide students during that procces. Example: if you search for "widget" and a thin affiliate or a spam site comes up first, the search results aren't that good.
Am I missing something?

On edit: I think Google is not happy because they have gone out of their way to say that results are automated, we fight spam via the algo, etc. etc. I was looking at the sites mentioned there with hidden text (one still has it); they're still on the index. I wonder if "bad" sites they're just buried in the serps, instead of banned. This could explain a lot of MIA sites

[edited by: walkman at 12:17 pm (utc) on June 6, 2005]