walkman - 6:34 am on Jul 13, 2011 (gmt 0)
I meant sites dying. I was going to use baby /bath water but throwing babies out seemed too drastic to use as a metaphor. Baby killer label and all :)
Dude, the "slow painful death" thing was just a metaphor. I'm not actually dying of pandalization, and neither are you. Moving your site from page 1 of the SERPs to page 2 is not even remotely equivalent or even vaguely similar to nuking a country. Have a sense of proportion. (of course, as any hitchhiker knows, "if life is going to exist in a Universe of this size, then one thing it cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion.")
I still think that they have enough power to run the whole thing at least monthly.
What makes you think that? It's just a hypothesis, and IMO it doesn't explain the data.
OK, let me ask you. For long do you think this will go on once started? Suppose Google says "I want to re-run original panda to assign a new score to those Pandalized on Feb 24th.' I seriously doubt it goes for weeks or months running on the background. Plus, if Google really wanted to they could run this instead of other Pandas. It's 5 months already and many businesses have been almost frozen out of the search engine with 70% (Us when adding AOL /Ask) to 95% (Europe) of traffic. Different people feel it differently but many it's extremely serious. Especially for those that have one good business site and that's it.
Then they are their resources, they have lots of computational power and it makes no sense to have a system you cannot update for many months.
I am voting on deliberate punishment, with some knife twisting* as a bonus.
* not a real knife.