Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: mack
Search for <snip> - 9 of the top 10 is <snip>.com....almost all serps seem to look pretty much this way...url only titles and just poorer than ever.
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 7:34 pm (utc) on Feb. 16, 2006]
[edit reason] I bet even <snip> itself has bad results ;) [/edit]
Create keywords subdomains, spam blogs, rule the pitiful MSN spam engine.
As god awful as those other results were, they were probably still superior to these roled back ones. At least those other ones seemed almost random. The rolled back ones remain universally miserable (if the terms are really targeted by anyone) in how one simpleton tactic works.
If I may quote David Lee Roth: "Big Bad Bill (Gates) is sweet William now." These results spark zero fear in the industry.
We did roll out an improvement to RankNet just a few hours before the thread started (you guys are quick!), but the tests we used to qualify that net did show a small improvement. We saw the negative responses on WebmasterWorld almost immediately, but our own personal “sanity-test” queries (mostly technical and scientific) worked fine, so we assumed it was just a few people grousing about their over-optimized sites getting hit. However, as time passed and the thread continued to be a) very busy and b) nearly 100% negative, it became clear that something was wrong. Deeper evaluation revealed that the problem was in the qualification test itself.
We rolled back to the old net after only about 48 hours. The new one might have been up considerably longer if you guys hadn’t been so vocal so quickly.
So we’d like to thank all of you for your feedback – no matter how negative it was.
On another note we did roll out some other changes as part of the release and thankfully we have not had the need to roll those back :) Here is a summary of some of the more visible changes that we made or changes that you all would likely detect.
User Experience: We lightened up and streamlined the UX a bit. Thanks for the positive feedback on this: [#*$!.com...] Isn’t the super-sized search bar at search.msn.com also refreshing?! That is a big search bar and it makes a big difference :)
Snippets / Contextual Descriptions: We made some changes to how we create contextual descriptions / snippets for pages. One clearly visible change is that we are now doing hit-highlighting in the title. We also have more subtle improvements around using page structure to get a true summary of the page. A decent example of this at: [search.msn.com...] or [search.msn.com...] You will notice that the descriptions tend to read like real sentences. This was not always the case.
Depth of crawl: Over the past month or so we rolled out an improvement that will allow us to crawl high quality domains more deeply. We are generally pretty content with the improvements we have seen. We still have a lot of work we want to do to improve our selection, however, this is a step forward. If you have any feedback on this in terms of what you are seeing on your end we would love to hear it.
Keep the feedback coming.
- msndude(msd) with input from the techy RankNet folks
Glad that depth of crawling is being addressed - hopefully improvements in this area will continue.
In another thread I pointed out that at the moment I cant get past page 25 of results - are you aware of this - or is it just me? Something to look at perhaps.
Another thing I cant understand is that pages that appear in a site:domain.com search dont appear in a normal serp search for the keyword - even if I go to the end of all results - as if the page disappears - would you like examples of this?