A list of Controversial Decisions by Google

[Brett_Tabke]

Wheel [webmasterworld.com] started a great list [webmasterworld.com] of controversial decisions by Google:

• Somebody decided on a 100 year cookie.
  
• Somebody decided to ban affiliates from adwords.
  
• Somebody decided their policy was to ignore pleas from those banned.
  
• Somebody decided not to provide adsense publishers with what percentage they are provided.
  
• Somebody made the decision to not send out vendor swag this year.
  
• Somebody hand picked the $20 mill amount, and somebody picked the charities.

Not the corporation. Employees and owners of the corporation made these decisions. Specific people.

What are some other controversial decisions by goog?

[wheel]

Perhaps one of the most distasteful? Pulling out of the conference circuit (fine with that I guess) and then having their employees pay their own way to those conferences.

That's poor treatment of EE's IMO. I don't like that, not one bit.

[ken_b]

Someone (a committee?) decided to let AdSense publishers run wild putting AdSense on unreviewed sites after their first site was approved.

Good for the short term bottom line? maybe

Good for the long term program? I doubt it.

[Leosghost]

Default silent optin to personalised search ( tracking across all things that the plex touches ..and the serving up serps and ads and adsense based upon it ) for everyone.

[zett]

• Somebody decided that Google now will run a free public DNS (fixing something that was not broken).
  
• Somebody decided that Google will sell their own phone, despite numerous claims not to sell hardware, ever.
  
• Somebody decided that they are now utilizing the massive collection of personal data without properly informing users about this step.

[Montresor]

Webmasters are complicit. Many including some in this discussion not only colluded in building the Gorg, but they continue to support the Gorg.

That webmasters decided that it was a good idea to submit their data in exchange for the hope that Webmaster Tools would help their SEO.

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to collude with Google in engaging in unfair competition by giving Google their website statistics in exchange for free analytics.

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to use the toolbar to check their PageRank in exchange for their surfing data.

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to participate in the Google Sitemaps program in exchange for their website data. Google Sitemaps do not change the fact that webmasters need links, good site architecture and if it makes them feel good, an HTML site map in order to get indexed and ranked. It's like the story of how the American Native Americans were swindled out of Manhattan in exchange for worthless beads. The Google Sitemap program is a necklace of plastic beads. Are you happy? Do you feel like a chump yet?

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to be paid by Google to promote FireFox over IE.

That webmasters decided it was a great idea to promote Chrome.

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to give lip service to encouraging competition by continuing to use Google Search (out of laziness).

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to not use Bing, Yahoo, or Ask.

That webmasters decided it was a good idea to be complacent.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Look in the mirror. You are the Gorg.

[Leosghost]

Never used or did any of the foregoing except use their search .and also used the other search engines ( except ask )..so please dont attribute what may be / have been your own actions to others ..After spending years speaking against the actions of the plex ..I will not accept being accused of complicity in their actions ..nor of complacence .

[wheel]

Despite what it sounds like, I'd like to think I'm not a ranting Google hater. I'm just cautious, and starting to be increasingly wary. And I don't have a webmaster tools account, and google analytics are running on exactly 0 sites that I control.

However, and to get back on topic, Google feels it's OK to publish on the internet pics of my home. I find that idea extremely obtrusive and invasive of my personal life.

And it's things like that that may lead to some grief for them. The folks at Monty Python (to paraphrase) once said that if they weren't PO'ing 5% of the people they weren't doing it right - they weren't living on the edge. Google's starting to ignore the wrong 5%. 95% of people don't care that Google's taking pics of your house, or copying books that are (C), or whatever. But 5% of us do. With Monty Python, the 5% meant that 95% loved them. With Google, it may mean that 5% turns the other 95%.

What if the next browser/internet client/email client/whatever creator is one of the 5%, and the latest app gets installed with the default search set to Bing?