If you ran Google, what changes would you make to their Algo?

[heretic]

Is there anything that you think Google could be doing to improve their search engine that they are not?

I'm finding trouble really saying there is something "wrong" or that they could be doing something to improve their search that they aren't...

Actually I do have one but I'll save it for the end...

[nutsandbolts]

Three things. Weekly full updates. E-mail support system in place (possible payment based) and more pictures from inside the 'Plex. ;)

But as for Algo changes - Mmmmm. Maybe remove penalties from sites at a quicker pace? :)

[ciml]

If I ran Google, I'd probably put the first three AdWords in the SERPs. I would increase the PPC income dramatically. Fortunately I don't run Google, and the people who do are more far-sighted than me (see Chiyo's excellent analysis of Google corporate strategy [webmasterworld.com]).

The best algo change, IMO, would be to make the theming deeper. If all the pages linking to the pages linking to a page are about climate research; then that page shouldn't come up top for "widgets for sale".

I'd also remove any aspects of Google involving server IP location, but I can see why the idea is attractive.

[Henley]

Yes!
I understand Google is looking at this; but please expedite a method of finding websites by location without all the dross. I don't think it probably matters whether it is postcode based but this seems to non-expert like me a good starting point. But at the moment if you search on widgetsville you get every page where that word appears irrespective of whether the concern is located there.

[wingslevel]

I would put two radio buttons right next to the search term box. One would say commercial sites and the other content sites (or something to that effect). If the user checked neither box then the serp would come up as now.

I would resolve the plural issue so that the search result for blue widget and blue widgets were the same.

[europeforvisitors]

I would put two radio buttons right next to the search term box. One would say commercial sites and the other content sites (or something to that effect). If the user checked neither box then the serp would come up as now.

I like that idea, although Google would have to figure out text that isn't confusing to the end user--maybe "I want general information on..." and "I want to shop for.."

The other problem is that it isn't always easy to tell what's a "commercial" site and what's a "content" or "information" site. Take sites like Gorp.com or Ricksteves.com: They're loaded with useful travel information, but they're also selling tours, so they don't fall neatly into a category. Even if Google gave up worrying about sites and simply indexed individual pages according to whether they were "shopping" or "information" pages, it would have at least two problems:

1) An information page might have a shopping-cart link without being a shopping page per se. (Example: A helpful and detailed "virus alert" page at the Symantec Antivirus Research Center that discusses the latest worm threat and has a small blurb for Norton AntiVirus with a shopping-cart link.)

2) E-commerce Webmasters would find ways to circumvent the algorithm and get their e-commerce pages into the "information only" index. Google would have to invest even more resources than it does now in identifying and penalizing SEO spam.

I would resolve the plural issue so that the search result for blue widget and blue widgets were the same.

I'd allow full stemming, so that (for example) "Asian travel" would be equivalent to "Asia travel" and vice versa in searches. Of course, this may be impractical because root words don't always retain their original meaning when used in compound words. "Football" is a good example. Obviously, a person searching on "football" doesn't want to see thousands of irrelevant listings. (It's tough enough for Google to distinguish between an anatomical "foot" and a "foot" that's a unit of measurement!) Maybe Google could compromise by ignoring compounds but using stemming with words that have suffixes. In other words:

Football - interpreted as "football" only
European - interpreted as "european" and "europe"

Also, roots by themselves could be given greater weight than roots that have suffixes, so that "Atlantic" would rank higher in a search on "Atlantic" than "transatlantic" would.

[excell]

If I was google I would probably try to disallow CJ and other affiliate redirect click listings in the SERPs and figure out a way to rid the index of one doorway page deep redirect spam pages with say over 5,000 examples at least as a starting point.

when you see spam up to 250,000 it makes you wonder sometimes what is actually in the google database :)

[john316]

If I was google I would probably begin to run a revenue/relevance algo, whereby those searches that competed with my adwords revenue would be subject to additional filtering for adwords competition.

I would probably do this in a subtle fashion so that I could continue to claim "editorial quality" search results.

[WebRookie]

If I were Google I would number the search results, making the results easier to read; date the search results; find more ways to delete spam (always going to be a hurdle for any engine).

[Helpmebe1]

ciml stataes I would put the adwords in the first three reuslts.. HELLO! This is why we like google.. because THEY DONT DO THAT! If you want paid for junk at the top of your listings.. go use lycos or yahoo.. this is one of the main advantages to google..because they DONT clutter up their site with paid for junk

As a side note.. the commerical and non commerical buttons is not a bad idea.. as long as they dont turn it into an ebay style or yahoo shopping style where you sort by price, etc... I am in NOWAY SHAPE OR FORM of seeing google do that..actually that would turn me off to google big big time!

ps..googleguy.. you digging this? where else can you go where people will tell you how to improve your results so much? Well I recommend putting my site #1 for all search pharases...just incase someone is listening :)

[cminblues]

If I was google I would probably make an effort in convincing my users/JoeSurfer that I'm not owned-cracked by any SEO OR adwords-campaign.. :)

[serious one]
I would also make a big effort in the javascript-scumware area, 'cause I [Google] think this is the most [potential] dangerous issue with my users, now.

cminblues

[AAnnAArchy]

I'd run a grammar check, so sites that are full of nonsense text (then redirect) wouldn't appear. As a bonus, it would make for lovely literate search results.

This isn't algorithm related, but I'd set up something that would allow webmasters to find out exactly where their sites were for each search term. For instance, a search for "Teal Widgets:TealWidgets.com" would show as a result - TealWidgets.com/6.

AAnn

[cminblues]

>>I'd set up something that would allow webmasters to find out exactly where their sites were for each search term.<<

Thus killing the challenge of writing google-friendly ranking-analysis softwares?
Hey how can my ego survive if this will happen?

Hehe just kidding.
I think, seriously, this is'nt a good idea from G. POV, 'cause the SEO's job would be a lot easier. :)

cminblues

[jk3210]

If I was the head-goo (GG1), I would bring everything to a halt and put 100% of Google's resources into developing a rock-solid, fool-proof way for the algo to determine the difference between a "relevant link" and a "non-relevant link," because, from the looks of this forum and others, there soon will be a massive amount of linking-for-PR activity far, FAR beyond what exists today, that, if left unchecked will absolutely cripple, and ultimately destroy the basic usefullness PageRank.

kw1-kw2-kw3.com linking to 3kw-2kw-1kw.com is NOT the "random sufer" model.

(And I'll just bet that GG1 thought of this before I did. ;) )

[MOOSBerlin]

Eemove penalties from sites at a quicker pace and a special email-account for this!

[Yidaki]

If i was google i would pack the bag, take a didge, go to the outback and let the seo's be seo's. ;)

Na, na, seriously:

- i would start to read, parse and interprete css
- ... same with js
- penalize if the above doesn't fit my TOS
- i would invest more / all into looking at patterns and template styles
- i would definitely try to better analyze the % of similarity of domains and only list one of them (which one? huh ...).
- i would do a extra link at the *last* result page to get all results including the above mentioned.
- <added>i would boot forever all webmasters that sign guestbooks of sites like "helping disabled kids in poland" and that say "Cool site! greetings from xycountry - visit xxxy.com". Additionally, if such webmasters then would come to WebmasterWorld to complain about google and beg gg to remove this unfair penalty, i would slap them with a google mousemate until they speak polish.</added>

... however, i'm Yidaki - without the big G in front of my name. ;)

[heretic]

I think if they updated every week it would be chaos. Look how everyone freaks because of changes in their ranking while the new index is still being tested...now imagine they went through this every week! I think it takes them half a week to a week to test if their algo changes were ok...

Here's a couple of suggestions:

1. How about a list of top search terms (with a count? of frequency) for the month?

2. How about for every search, you are given the count of how many times it had been searched that month.

I doubt they would ever actually offer that as it would just result in all you guys driving yourselves nuts making pages to match those keywords to get people to your site...relevant traffic or not...but it would be cool from a webmaster's/searcher's POV :)

[Macguru]

Not really a change in algorythm (like most suggestions above), but I would not mix foreign filetypes with web standards. I believe an extra tab could make, .pdf, .doc and the likes right at home.

[Yidaki]

macguru, good suggestion! Allthough i'm not hyped at this, i would also add a mp3 tab. Pretty sure, they're allready working on this. [... Yidaki goes to check google lab ... no mp3 search, yet]

[Darichman]

I would allow webmasters to clasify their sites using meta tags. This would tell the crawler whether the site is commercial or content based. Then it would be easy to have a checkbox for searchers to select whether they want only shopping sites or only research sites or charity sites or all sites etc...

Any method to help the searcher narrow down their search to a specific topic or type of site would be helpful.

I would also list similar keywords. Like if someone searched for the keyword "dolls" I would list the top 20 keywords searched for with that keyword in it.

i.e.

Other similar keywords for the term "dolls"
cartoon doll
goo goo doll
doll maker
doll house
barbie doll
cartoon doll maker
paper doll
american girl doll
real doll
baby doll
porcelain doll
dress up doll
kiss doll
collectible doll

Just like the keyword suggestion tool at overture but on the result's pages with links to the search results. This would help people who search for a general search term narrow down their search.

I would also discount the keyword in the domain algo. i.e. kwd1-kwd2-kwd3.com.

Other than that, I think google is allmost perfect.

[edited by: ciml at 10:28 pm (utc) on Nov. 2, 2002]
[edit reason] One of the dolls was a little 'unsuitable' ;) [/edit]

[vitaplease]

You'll find some older suggestions here as well:

[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]