Reno - 7:48 pm on Feb 28, 2011 (gmt 0)
a small minority who were clamoring for an algo update to fix the low quality content issue and then when it happened realized that they meant other sites, not their own.
Yes, we agree on that ~ "be careful what you ask for because you just might get it".
My problem is with generalities when the fix should be with specifics. To wit, Google says it is going after "low quality" sites, but has never once (to the best of my knowledge) defined what "low quality" means. Well, it means different things to different people, and therefore means almost nothing.
But here is a specific that Google could go after that would fix a lot about what's wrong:
* Determine the originators of content and give them the extra point; and simultaneously, determine the copiers of original content and score them a negative point.
That seems pretty clear to me, as opposed to the meaningless "low quality". But there are those who will say "but that's too hard". You mean it's harder to determine the originator of content than it is to determine degrees of "quality"? OK, here's a clue: The originator put the content up FIRST. Does that make it a little easier?