If its so bad, why does Google have Google Groups?
Jammer
11:53 am on Nov 28, 2003 (gmt 0)
Have I missed something in the duplicate content (dmoz clone) debate, but why does google have a 'copy' of dmoz and why does it not zero out itself from the results?
Has Google made an exception with itself here or does it not find duplicate content bad?
Interested in others opinions...
ThomasB
11:24 pm on Nov 28, 2003 (gmt 0)
That's a great question. I think Google should really think about that. The relevancy is probably met when a GoogleGroup site is displayed, but diversity isn't met for sure. The only added value I can see are the colors and maybe the speed. But I think most ODP clones or even datafeed-driven affiliate sites offer the same.
jtbell
12:26 am on Nov 29, 2003 (gmt 0)
Google's directory is not simply a duplicate of the DMOZ directory, even after allowing for the fact that it lags the DMOZ directory by at least a few weeks. Google addes the PageRank bars and sorts the listings for each category by PageRank value.
ThomasB
3:12 pm on Nov 29, 2003 (gmt 0)
But is the PageRank important for normal users? I think it just reflects the amount of links to a site or the money invested in buying links these days. But relevancy for categories is no criteria for the ranking. There are some sites out there selling productcategory a and b, listed on top of both categories because they have a higher PR than sites just selling products from 1 category. But I think sites selling just one type are often more relevant because they offer maybe a better service or more information on the products. I also thought that PR is no more important ...
