tedster - 3:46 am on Dec 31, 2006 (gmt 0)

Do anyone else have the sense that Google is up to something new with the Supplemental Index in the past maybe two months or so?

My subjective sense is that if we had the ratio of Suppementals to all URLs from last summer, and could compare that to the same ratio in present time, we would see a jump of major significance. Couple that with recent statements from Matt Cutts and Adam Lasnik recently to the effect that Supplementals aren't always "bad" in every case, and I'm beginning to wonder what's up -- what we think we know may no longer be the whole story.