Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
If the "filtering" is turned on ( which i always set to strict because of my sensitive personality :P ) after clicking through the first 10 pages (hundred results) or in my case on the second page (100 urls per page) the results end with the "click here for omitted results link". The end. Meaning that what i can do, is see MORE results from the SAME domains i already saw.
So far i have concluded that it must be the adult filter that wouldn't let the other 869 domains pass the test to come up for a query relevant to them.
So i turned the filter OFF.
...er...
Now i'm seeing this at the last page:
Results 101 - 131 of about 39,800,000
Which is 20.000.000 LESS than with the filter ON, but these are estimates after all ;)
The number of URLs did not increase a bit.
...
My question thus is:
Why does the index list but 131 URLs from about only 80 domains for a keyphrase that would obviously match another 50.000.000?
Why no one pass the top ranking 80 or so domains can be shown, if nowhere else, then starting from position 132?
When the thresholds are so strict that the index can't even produce more than like a hundred domains, and there are 50.000.000 matching URLs to chose from... what good does it do, to not let another 800 valid, normal, down to earth sites onto the result pages AFTER the first 80 domains?
...
And this time i'm not asking from a technical perspective.
Neither am i whining, i'm at the point where i'm honestly, whole-heartedly became curious of the ideals behind this method.
For... from another perspective...
Why is it good for Google to show less and less options for the user, also showing mostly the same results over and over again.
The keyphrase i'm referring to had a threshold set in the summer that allowed about 300 results. The past months allowed about 250 URLs shown. Now it's 131.
I don't get it and perhaps someone can enlighten me. I'd simply like to know the idea, the rhethoric, the reason for this. And something else than "there are no more notable sites/domains", which judgement Google has so far trusted its users, and not its algo with. Why is this considered a good practice? For i have no doubt that it is considered as such by Google, only that i don't know WHY.
Oh and, in case this is of no interest to anyone at all, sorry ;)
It is to me.
[edited by: tedster at 3:27 pm (utc) on Nov. 21, 2006]
