Lenny2 - 7:29 pm on Nov 11, 2011 (gmt 0)
@Tedster, the argument that they use the data to qualify their algorithmic data doesn't sit well for me. The reason being that no matter how you cut the cheese they are using the data. The old quip: "which came first, the chicken or the egg" comes to mind.
Allow me to explain:
They have a preconceived vision of the web which they train their staff. The staff then goes about their work qualifying websites according to this doctrine. Another set of engineers build an algorithm according to the same doctrine/or at least the same school of thought.
They then compare the results and low and behold the machine matches up with what they trained their peeps to find.
So the question about the chicken and the egg comes up....
Personally, as a webmaster/site owner/business owner/tax payer/employer/father/husband/son/friend/patron/whatever, it doesn't matter which came first. The point is that Google is not looking for the Mona Lisas; google is looking for the scalable solutions and if I want to maintain any rankings in their system I have to conform. That's all.
BUT, actually I didn't want to necessarily espouse my own ideas... I was more interested in getting this conversation going about the manual... WHAT INSIGHTS DID YOU GUYS SEE IN THIS?