Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
Forum Moderators: open
Maybe it would be nice if others add what I forgot. It would be nice, too, if we can keep it like some kind of an overview - focused on topic.
Here I go:
SJ started testing a new index with a sightly different build of backlinks.
GoogleGuy msg #44 May 5
rfgdxm1, every index has to pass a really stringent battery of tests before it becomes visible. SEOs might notice a slightly different build of backlinks, but things like that could be balanced by factors that improve search quality more in other areas. The other thing to bear in mind is that it's easy to re-sync something like backlinks or spam snapshots once you're convinced that an algorithm or method is an improvement.
SJ results will show up at other data centers soon
GoogleGuy msg #107 May 5
Critter, it wouldn't surprise me to see SJ results start to show up at other data centers soon.
Test of new method with a known base of backlinks, bringing in more up-to-date backlink and spam info later on
GoogleGuy msg #134 May 5
Traveler, good question. From the first few posts of that 500+ thread, several people mentioned that they have some very new results in SJ. It's natural that we would test new methods by using a known base of backlinks, but that shouldn't be discouraging to people--backlinks are the sort of data that Google could bring back in over a relatively short time frame. And the same thing goes for known snapshots of spam--that can be brought in fairly quickly as well. SEOs notice whether a backlink comes from two months ago or one month ago, but typical users would care more about fresher pages.
SJ index is not old
GoogleGuy msg #146 May 5
Critter, the SJ index isn't an older index. You can verify that by doing a topical query such as SARS. The results are more fresh in SJ than they are in our regular index.
About backlinks from forums
GoogleGuy msg #160 May 5
Critter, if it's the site listed in your profile, it looks like you only have 5-6 domains that link to your site. A few of those are forum links that might not have made it into the base of backlinks. Getting links from places like the Open Directory Project would help, for example.
About guestbook links
GoogleGuy msg 165 May 5
Much more likely that those guestbook links just aren't given weight now, rfgdxm1.
Backlinks and spam snapshots will be added later
GoogleGuy msg 178 May 5
mcavic, I think I did say that newer backlinks and spam snapshots would be pending to be applied over time. Or at least I tried to. :)
SJ data will show up at other data centers first, new data / filters after that
GoogleGuy msg #298 May 5
albert, what you said, except I wouldn't be surprised to see SJ show up at other data centers first, and then to start applying the newer data/filters after that.
Less Backlinks for all sites
GoogleGuy msg #108 May 6
Don't be alarmed if the number of reported backlinks goes down. That's actually to be expected in the update. Most of it affects all sites uniformly, so it comes out in the wash as being equal. The better way to measure it is how your rankings/traffic change.
SJ results will show up at other data centers
GoogleGuy msg #43 May 6
What rfgdxm1 said. I think you'll see SJ results appear at more data centers over time.
GoogleGuy msg #11 May 8
I'm still hanging around. There's not that much new info to convey, but I'm here.
A few more backlinks were added
GoogleGuy msg #197 May 10
I think we added a few more backlinks in yesterday. I'm assuming people have read HitProf's thread on backlinks too? rfgdxm1, sorry to hear that you don't like the SJ index. I also checked your ingredient theory in your spam report. People had suggested that a long time ago at the GooglePlex, but that's not the primary addition for SJ.
It was only a minor update (so far)
GoogleGuy msg 203 May 10
Twas a minor update in backlinks, MyWifeSays. I still expect SJ results to be seen at more data centers first.
sj/fi index will shift to other data centers. After more backlinks and other data
GoogleGuy msg #52 May 14
webdev, I think almost all of these questions have been answered several hundred threads ago. As late as this morning, I posted saying that I expected sj/fi index data to make its way to other data centers and to various sites. Once that data appears more broadly, we'll gradually be pulling in more backlinks and applying other data.
sj/fi data centers have been approved
GoogleGuy msg #59 May 14
steve128, the sj/fi data centers have been tested and approved. What I said several hundred posts ago was that you can expect an index like that to show up at more (and possibly all) data centers in the future.
More pages and backlinks to be added
GoogleGuy msg #73 May 14
Ltribe, I expect more pages and backlinks to be brought in with time.
Help spread the word ...
GoogleGuy msg#86 May 14
Maybe I'll just set things up to auto-post every 50 posts or so. :)
Please help spread the word so people know what to expect and don't worry too much.
Basically he said that each data center is meant to do different things, and that sj was specifically meant to be good at finding TOPICAL pages (like those relating to SARS)
I think it's signficant becuase here we all assume that playing with indexes has mainly to do with spam-killing or some form of "relevance".
here GG is saying that at least sometimes there is more than one way to contruct an index/algo and it depends on the customer's motivation! That assuming that there is ONE best index, which we assume here a lot, is wrong.
Not sure where this is going but it will be very interesting. Diff indexes for diff partners? Or a multitude of things im not even going to mention yet!
Let's see what pans out in the next few months...
I have been monitoring several dozen websites, and I quickly noted that SJ was [at first] bumping up the SERPs on my sites it shouldn't have (new, smaller sites), and lowering my stronger ones.
After noticing GG's post that we would probably "see SJ show up at other data centers first, and then to start applying the newer data/filters after that," I came to the conclusion that it was too early to get nervous, and wait it out.
In my case (overall), I can see things slowly improving, but I'm a little concerned that the quality of G's search results have been highly questionable for quite some time.
Fortunately, I have been buried with projects for the past several weeks and haven't had much time for analysis of what seems to be a very looooong and frustrating process.
Other than reading tea leaves - or scanning a 'gazzillion' posts - the only thing we have to go by is GG's input as an indication for the future, so your summary is much appreciated.
It does seem wierd what they are doing though. Putting sj's historical results with new algorithm on the partners, and continuing to update and add backlinks on google....
I mean, if it's so easy to apply backlinks and spam filters, why not do it? Why bother to send out old results with new algorithm to the partners? Why update partners and not Google?
Just seems strange to me.
>>It does seem wierd what they are doing though. Putting sj's historical results with new algorithm on the partners, and continuing to update and add backlinks on google....
I mean, if it's so easy to apply backlinks and spam filters, why not do it? Why bother to send out old results with new algorithm to the partners?<<
This, more than anything is what confuses me. I would love to hear some clarification on why they chose to use February backlink data and why it takes so much longer than usual to add backlinks and recent crawl data.
So sj/fi are different in several ways. I would expect that difference to spread to other data centers. Then things will resume moving forward.
Hope that helps,
Thanks - it's better these get appended to the original message.
PS I suggest you put the above up into your top message too - I'd be really interested to read these GG responses in one list.... not that I expect it to become any clearer than the mud it currently is!
GoogleGuy on May 5th:-
"backlinks are the sort of data that Google could bring back in over a relatively short time frame."
GoogleGuy on May 14th:-
"There's a lot of backlinks on the web. :) It will take some time to bring them all in."
GoogleGuy on May 5th:-
"albert, what you said, except I wouldn't be surprised to see SJ show up at other data centers first, and then to start applying the newer data/filters after that."
GoogleGuy on May 14th:-
"I wouldn't draw huge distinctions between sj and fi. When I say "I expect the sj index to spread to other data centers," that could be sj or fi."
"So sj/fi are different in several ways. I would expect that difference to spread to other data centers. Then things will resume moving forward."
I'm beginning to wonder if the posting of yesterday that suggested this may be a monumental c*ck-up by google, and they are now trying to pick up the pieces, is true.
I'm not having a go at google if that is the case. It happens. We've all experienced computer crashes, data loss etc etc - some of us (me included) on a large scale.
But what's the point of feeding people on here confused and contradictory information?
I do feel very sorry for those with sites who rely on google for traffic. It's not necessarily their fault that is the case - google created this monster, they know people rely on it, and they have a moral duty to control it.
[edited by: trillianjedi at 4:36 pm (utc) on May 14, 2003]
Are you guys saying that Google is emphasising more "topical" or theme-based results now? I guess you won't answer GG but I'd like to know other people's opinion as far as Google identifying themes within link patterns and if that has anything to do with their new algo.
Chiyo - I would appreciate it if you could tell me where GG said the emphasis of SJ is more topical results, I can't seem to find it.
Our results on -sj and -fi are different. And we interpret your input to say they might indeed remain different.
That would leave one to believe that each datacenter will play by the same rules of the game, however the rules are applied to their own databanks which will be different here and there, so results will vary from center to center indifinitely, and therefore depending on different factors webmasters can expect varying results for Google searches as a general phenom and over time, not an exception. Which would be a change.
A very nice 'from the horses mouth' expose. For those finding contradictions, you should remember that the process is fluid, and they are trying out new things constantly, as it seems this is like no update they have done before, or at least this is the first time that we have been able to watch and ask about it to some extent.
If things aren't changing as they go to some extent, it wouldn't be like any dev environment I've ever worked in.
trillianjedi, just to clarify on the other point, I mentioned that backlinks could be brought in on a relatively short timeframe, but remember that we are talking about terabytes of data here--the web is a big chunk of data. I think I also replied to someone else at one point that bringing in those backlinks wasn't the sort of thing that could happen in a day or two. Hope that sheds more light on things. Phrases like "gradually" and "over time" are cues that some types of data definitely can't be brought in overnight.
Given that FI is the source for AOL's google results, and that SJ has not materialized anywhere yet, I wonder if this means that the FI feed will become the main one?
It seems funny that they would release a version to AOL that was using old data, yet from my experience pages are still missing. The only page from my sites I can find in the index is one from several indexes ago, so I think FI is working on old data.
That makes sense, at least to me. One of the biggest gripes against Google is that sites become totally reliant on them. If you now rank well in only half the Google data centres you'll recieve half the traffic. This should go some way to relieving the webmasters' fear of being totally dropped.
It also makes sense from a theme perspective. You might want to conduct several types of search: academic, commercial, current affairs etc. Now there may be a chance to get that if Google clarifies which index serves which purpose.
Or of course it could just be wishful thinking?
S/he referred to "sj and fi are different" - but s/he didn't mean from each other, if you re-read his posts.
(Hey, maybe it's actually GoogleGal :-)