msndude - 3:57 am on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

This is some great feedback! Let me add a couple of ideas.

To oversimplify our discussion on quality and authority, a quality result is one that satisfies a customer – even if a spammer did produce it. Building on that, I suggest the following three rules

1) “Spam is a low-quality page that ranks above a high-quality page” works pretty well, as long as you agree that Spam is a bug in the engine, not a moral failing in someone else. The best part about that point of view is that you have a better chance at fixing your own code than you do of elevating anyone else’s morals.

2) Even a quality result is only quality the first time it appears in the results. The repeats are all Spam.

3) A page with stolen content is always Spam. Even though it might satisfy a customer short-term, it undermines the entire enterprise in the long run because it discourages people from producing original content.

I think this is compatible with most of the feedback so far. Did I leave anything out?