---- The Google site: operator seems broken - is this intentional?
tangor - 3:53 am on Apr 28, 2010 (gmt 0)
That is not just my opinion, it's a statement based on my experience and observation.
I tend to think content wins overall, but there's no doubt you can't find content without links... and you can't find links without links. Personally, I tend to think that links to links have limited appeal and links to content fare better.
What is broken (or appears to be broken) is the active part of site: which used to give more info than it does in recent days. As to why that is happening there's only speculation, no answers.
Has G has bit off more than it can chew? Has it invested way too much in personalizing ads, and chasing the long tail to do same, and is running out of go juice to get it done? Merely a personal observation of my experience with google over the last ten years.
However, I do freely admit that my attempt at humor with "squatty parts" might not have been appreciated in the same manner as intended. I will keep that humor in check henceforth! I certainly have no intention of misleading folks.