econman - 9:35 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

I think most webmasters distinguish between quality and spam; they aren't the same thing; as well, there is a difference between a flawed set of SERPs and Spam.

So, how about this modification to msndude's proposed definition:

“Spam is typically a low-quality page that tricks the search engine into ranking it above higher-quality pages through deceptive techniques”

I agree that a quality result is only quality the first time it appears in the results. However, repetition isn't the same thing as Spam. Repetition could be due to flaws in the Search Engine's Algos, and not due to deceptive techniques or "spamming" activities.

Stealing or duplicating content can be part of a Spamming effort, particularly if the Search Engine is deceived into thinking the document in question is the original source of the content in question. But, we shouldn't try to squeeze all these different morally dubious concepts into a single catch-all name "Spam."