hitchhiker - 10:26 pm on Jun 16, 2013 (gmt 0) [edited by: hitchhiker at 10:49 pm (utc) on Jun 16, 2013]
Hey man, thanks for that. I re-read it twice to make sure I understood you accurately.
It would be true, except you've not considered one major factor:
It is extremely dangerous, under any circumstances, to endow SITE B power over SITE A. Until this point, you lived or died by your own hand.
After this point they immediately introduced an entire 'realm' of new blackhat techniques. Far greater (it turns out) than the SPAM they were trying to conquer. It must be reversed.
@diberry - assuming 'they know' is (in my humble estimation) a mistake. Plus you are discounting the effect 'publically analysed mistakes' has on a large corporation.
we might manage to offer a fresh perspective
You have no idea how true that is, if it was possible I would inject you and a few others here directly into the plex and happily be done with this whole thing. Source: I've worked with one of the largest tech companies in the world (won't say who, not 'search', but they were probably the biggest, now not so much because of almost exactly this problem)
Core teams lost site of the bigger picture, their jobs were extremely hard, they were hit from all sides, they didn't organise efficient human feedback and instead relied on data sets to get feedback, those data sets (increasingly inaccurate as models grew) eventually capsized the ship.
[edited by: hitchhiker at 10:49 pm (utc) on Jun 16, 2013]