Google is indeed broken

Guestbook links still rule

[sirlion]

My turn now for the disappearing site trick. Was #1 then #6 now gone. For a very competitve key phrase in a financial area there is a meatball site at #6- All keywords with over 200 backlinks all from guestbooks as far as I can tell. Don't ask for PR, the toolbar has been broken too since Domenic propogated all servers. If this is an example of the serps now and maybe to come it will be RIP Google soon. If anyone is interested in the url I reference here you can sticky me and I'll send it.

[2_much]

Google I think has the smartest approach toward SEO's. They're here answering questions aren't they?

But what can they do with that information?

Improve their algo. Which often means - cracking down on SEO's that have figured out ways to manipulate their algo.

[bolitto]

2_much are you in any way implying googleguy is actually here to crack down on SEO?

wouldn't that be high treason?

[chiyo]

yes 2 much has got it right again i think. SEO *generally* degrades results for users, not so much as spam, but its very significant. Basically any technique not related to the intrinsic value of the page that can lift it above other pages of higher value but not SEO'd is not in google's or users interests. One thing GG does is to correct misperceptions by giving a google employee view, to encourage SEOs to practice SEO that benefits both and not just "tricks", and finally find out what SEOs are doing!

That said..

1. If SEOs have REALLY good tricks they are not going to publish it on WebmasterWorld

2. All other search engine reps are looking very closely too. lurking so to speak. They hear everthing that GoogleGuy does, and benefit themseleves, as we do, from his particpation.

[heini]

>the intrinsic value of the page

Search engines do not measure the intrinsic value of a page. Whatever that might be in the first place.

What search engines do (assuming they get the job done at all) is returning relevant results to queries. That's it.
You can have the most valuable resource in the world - if it's on #10024 nobody ever will find it.

The assumption SEO is per design about pushing bad results to the top is of course not true. Just ask the clients, if they think their pages have no intrinsic value. They certainly think their pages are good enough to pay good money for bringing them to the top.

There are a lot of members here, who are simply webpublishers, who learn all the stuff from SEOs. Why? Because they want their sites and pages to be found! Why? Because they think their pages are good and deserve being found!

The intrinsic value of a page....I bet it doesn't even work like that in a academic environment.
I worked in a area where commercial interests where nearly inknown. SEO? I bet none of the publishers in that field even knew what that was. In no way the pages with the highest intrinsic value came out on top of search engines serps.

[rfgdxm1]

>There are a lot of members here, who are simply webpublishers, who learn all the stuff from SEOs. Why? Because they want their sites and pages to be found! Why? Because they think their pages are good and deserve being found!

I am such an amateur webmaster. There probably is some correlation between amateur sites where the webmaster uses SEO and quality. That they go to the effort of learning SEO would suggest they likely spend time developing their site with worthwhile content. Getting #1 in the SERPs is pointless if people quickly click the "back" button on their browser looking for a better site.

[chiyo]

>>the intrinsic value of the page<<

ah when i first wrote that i was thinking of changing it because I **knew** somebody - (maybe Heini!) would correct me with my wording :)

what i SHOULD have said of course is that se's dont need pages being SEO'd to the extent that they outrank other more RELEVANT pages.

Still havent said it right, but the key is that SEO gives a competitive advantage to those who use it not because their page is any more relevant but that they paid for someone to give then a competitive advantage over other similar pages!

heini also wrote: >>The assumption SEO is per design about pushing bad results to the top is of course not true. Just ask the clients, if they think their pages have no intrinsic value. They certainly think their pages are good enough to pay good money for bringing them to the top.<<

you are refuting an argument that i dont think anybody made in this thread. At least i dont think sEo is about pushing bad results to the top - its more about using one method of giving your listings a competitive advantage against similar pages on the net. I agree that the geay majority of SEO's are working with good pages anyway, but if they dont get any advantage over competitors from SEO, what are they paying for? I agree a lot of SEO can help webmasters target better, which is in the interest of all, and i am sure there are other ways which meet the interests of users, SEs and webmasters, but in the end its all about increasing and enhancing exposure in SE's, as is advertising, PFI, and PPC.

>>In no way the pages with the highest intrinsic value came out on top of search engines serps.
<<

OK OK! I accept my wording was poor; Ive tried to make it better in the first paras above and change "intrinsic value" to "relevance value", so you know better what i meant..

[Patrick Taylor]

I'm a comparative newcomer to the workings of search engines, but I'm not a newcomer to a world where it's normal to say "sorry" when you get something wrong. By all accounts, Google's current service is not up to scratch. Their search results have been out of date for a few weeks. Why don't they just say "sorry"? I don't mean to me and all the other webmasters and website owners who can't get fresh content into their index, but to their customers - people who use their site to find the latest information on the World Wide Web. Other reputable companies in the big wide world apologize to their customers so why doesn't Google do it? It would be the ethical thing do do, in the same way that not spamming is the ethical thing Google wants webmasters to do. It's even more important that they do this because it appears Joe Public isn't noticing and is thereby being misled. When a train is late, even though everybody knows it's late, an apology is usually given and includes a best guess about when the train will come, then passengers feel better treated and can make their own decisions about whether to wait or to make alternative arrangements. In Google's case most customers appear not to even know the train is late, so they could be making bad decisions, therefore Google has an ethical responsibility and well as a customer care issue.

Of course they would lose business in the short term but their very own argument to webmasters who are losing business from Google at present is to look to the long term. Maybe they should take their own advice. I don't say they have any obligation to me to explain why I can't get my site into their index, but as a user of their search engine they would earn my respect by stating the facts... that their index is temporarily out of date or that they're having technical issues to resolve - whatever - but that their service will ultimately be better. I'm not cynical about Google's aims to make the web a better place. I happen to trust this is genuinely what they want. I just feel they should be more honest and open about it.