moTi - 2:20 pm on Mar 26, 2013 (gmt 0)
ok, ranting time. i'll play the devil's advocate. eat this:
i can't remember that i've ever read a WebmasterWorld member stating that the fresh website who dares to rank above him is a good website with quality content and deserved the rise to the top. strangely, every time that happens, the content of the new contestants is disqualified as utter rubbish.
sadly, WebmasterWorld nowadays seems to be a pool of grayed established publishers with mostly decades-old content who most of the time do nothing else than complain about the newcomers instead of getting their act together and step up to a new level in order to face the competition. how dare others come up with fresh ideas in order to disrupt the set structures.
ranking a quality new website nowadays is so much harder than ten or five years ago. my website is top-notch in its area, it absolutely deserves to overtake the old stuff in the serps in next to no time. instead, it's a wearing and depressingly tedious fight for months and months with various setbacks for whatever reasons google decides.
i'm sick of the whining. it's pure preservation of the status quo with the established webmasters enviously only wanting to preserve their dated, meanwhile often completely useless stuff in the serps. i'd wholeheartedly welcome any step google and its algorithms take to understand the quality of new websites more rapidly.