Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.146.5.43

Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & andy langton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google - Is it time for human editing of results?

     
11:13 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 19, 2006
posts:805
votes: 0


When is the time going to come (if ever) that Google will start to use more real humans to assist with the editing of the results in it's search engine. Surely it must be impossible to use a mathematical ranking formula to determine ranking in every single case when you have the whole world trying every trick in the book to climb over the person in front of them?
11:23 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

Administrator from US 

WebmasterWorld Administrator brett_tabke is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Sept 21, 1999
posts:38070
votes: 16


Last time we heard, Google had over 8k employees. What do you think they are all doing? Google already does more hand editing than most can phathom.
11:34 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member beedeedubbleu is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 3, 2004
posts:6117
votes: 17


What do you think they are all doing?

Sometimes I wonder. ;)

11:40 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 12, 2005
posts:227
votes: 0


I thought over 7K were employed just to count the money. )
11:49 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 19, 2006
posts:805
votes: 0


Brett - I don't know the extent of their editing but my point is that currently it does not appear to be enough. I would be interested to know what % of their staff are allocated to this area.
11:50 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 14, 2007
posts:40
votes: 0


They probably use machines for counting money :)
12:07 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 26, 2006
posts:298
votes: 9


I doubt very much that there is dedicated humans editing other than looking at Spam Reports. IF confirmed that they were infact editing sites and applying value to them i.e. choosing a site with a blue theme selling widgets over a site with a pink theme selling the same widgets, Google's credibilty as a search engine would be over. With 8K emplyees, this type of action will eventually leek. They cannot afford that.
12:15 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 30, 2003
posts:932
votes: 0


Billions of pages = millions of employees. It will never happen.
2:35 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tedster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:May 26, 2000
posts:37301
votes: 0


This thread is worth the read, for those who haven't already.

Human Editorial Input - about the 2006 patent [webmasterworld.com]

3:13 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Administrator from US 

WebmasterWorld Administrator brett_tabke is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Sept 21, 1999
posts:38070
votes: 16


I would bet 75% of the current page listings have had eyes on that site at one point or another. At a minimum, 75% of the sites in the majority of serps have had "eyes on" by a Googler at some point in their history. Dmoz has millions of sites reviewed by amatures. Imagine what a group of thousands of highly trained pro's with the right tools could do. The other 25% Google can afford to "ignore" (eg: adult, ecom one offs, misc long tail trash...)
4:02 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 19, 2006
posts:805
votes: 0


If they want the best search engine with the best results I think they need real eyes to keep it in check - The best sites on the web have moderators....
4:09 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 31, 2002
posts:93
votes: 0


I agree Brett.

The other day, MC blogged,
[mattcutts.com...]

In the comment section Kirby Said

--
Try being just mom and pop who donít know how to play the Digg game, donít blog endlessly and donít go to SES or PubCon. They wonít attract many editorially given links without a little help.
--

MatT Cutts replied:

--
Kirby, there are steps that we take to try to help those Mom/Pop sites as well.
--

I take that reply for an indication that human review would be part of that.

5:33 am on Jan 18, 2007 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 28, 2006
posts:124
votes: 0


We ran a test once, small and not scientific but more than anectdotal. A search engine algorithm performs about at the level of an 11 year old kid. A twelve or thirteen year old beats it every time. So it's well past time for human editing. Especially with the massive amounts of money at stake.
But then you look at some of the results and have to wonder. Why would a search for search engine show google first at MSN.com and Yahoo?