Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
How it is possible for inaccurate information to accurately indicating the importance of a page (or anything)?
Again, most inaccuracies will be invisible because the toolbar gauge has such broad increments. To use the fuel-tank analogy again, if the gauge shows the tank being a quarter-full, it doesn't matter if the actual amount is .20, .25, or .29 full, because the gauge is meant to show (and does show) only an approximate amount.
The only time the toolbar gauge's possible inaccuracy comes into play is when the true PageRank crosses the line from 6.00 to 5.99, from 3.9 to 4.1, etc. and the toolbar is delayed in catching up. And that's likely to be an infrequent event that doesn't affect most pages most of the time.
[edited by: tedster at 7:52 pm (utc) on Aug. 14, 2007]
But I'm beginning to wonder whether that attitude has been shifting over the past few years, as the WWW becomes more and more a hugely important commercial vehicle, so people are less inclined to send their visitors offsite for any reason.
I've seen the opposite of that in the last year or two. Some large newspapers that used to eschew "hot links" are now linking to third-party sites instead of just mentioning the sites by name. That's obviously good for online retailers, booking sites, etc. that have noteworthy products or services and that understand the value of public relations as opposed to mere link-swapping.
As for e-commerce sites, have many of them ever linked to other sites (except as participants in reciprocal-linking schemes)?
With so many small businesses now feeling the need to have their own website, that part of the web has got to be growing as fast or faster than any other part.
And the fact is, when people are looking to purchase something, a small business may have exactly what they are looking for, so it's to everyone's advantage to have that company come up as an easy-to-find choice.
This "link hoarding" attitude (information sites excluded!) is a trend I see getting more common over time, not improving. And Google's newly published guideline, as it is currently written, gives people even less reason to feel enthusiastic about external links. Hope I'm wrong.
....................................
This "link hoarding" attitude (information sites excluded!) is a trend I see getting more common over time, not improving.
Sure, but I don't think toolbar PR (accurate or otherwise) or Google's promotional description of the PR "fuel gauage" is going to have much, if any, effect on link hoarding. Even if the toolbar disappeared tomorrow, link hoarders would know that PR exists--and even if they didn't know about the existence of PageRank, they'd still have the attitude of "I don't want potential buyers leaving my site."
I am surprised to see that people do not use PR more often to judge validity and relevance. Google's algo is based on these factors. If you are an online retailer, have been around for some years and your website PR is 0-2 to me it says that not enough people find your web design, products or services
exciting enough to link to.And of course the way to judge is not by saying the more the pagerank the better the online shop, but a PR4 and above would give enough indication of a healthy site (in terms of popularity and trust) and therefore more likely 'not to be' dodgy. There are enough cons and spammers (of any sort) out there..
How can you tell from the toolbar how long a site has been around?
I never tried to look at the toolbar through a consumer's eyes until now but after reflecting on communications I have with consumers on a daily basis by phone and email, I think you are correct that many people do as you do. The PR display does indeed convey this message, and these consumers welcome anything they believe is helping to keep them safer online.
There are many trust factors you can look for on a retail site but PR isn't one of them. I think con artists and spammers are more likely to have higher PR than legitimate businesses. Excluding nationally and internationally known brands of course. They get links. Most small businesses don't have the time, other resources or the desire to play linking games. Most of the products people want and need just aren't exciting enough to create a linking frenzy.
as the WWW becomes more and more a hugely important commercial vehicle, so people are less inclined to send their visitors offsite for any reason. I'm wondering if for many businesses that sell something -- as opposed to providing pure information or opinion -- if the attitude isn't becoming more of "keep them inside the store", much as it has been in the bricks & mortar world.
Most businesses, online and off, freely recommend other businesses based on my experience. Referring people to related businesses is good customer service; customers appreciate and remember it. Online it's mostly done through phone and email. Even when referral links do exist on a site, the majority still call or write to ask. The only compelling reason to link to them is solely for search engines.
how Google maintains and describes the toolbar PR gauge just isn't that important (especially to users, who aren't likely to digest and certainly aren't likely to remember whatever Google says about it in a FAQ or on a download page).
Just as myths and misunderstandings are widespread among webmasters, it's actually much worse with average users. Most business models don't have the luxury of ignoring user perception.
Even if the toolbar disappeared tomorrow, link hoarders would know that PR exists--and even if they didn't know about the existence of PageRank, they'd still have the attitude of "I don't want potential buyers leaving my site."
Doesn't every type of site (with the exception of MFA and similar sites) want to keep visitors? If sites don't have compelling reasons for visitors to remain, those visitors are more likely to hit the back button than to stay and dig around for referral links.
Just as myths and misunderstandings are widespread among webmasters, it's actually much worse with average users.
A "myth or misunderstanding" requires awareness. How many users pay much attention to the PR "fuel gauge"? Probably about as many as the number who pay attention to the "AutoLink" button and the "Toggle highlighting of search terms on this page" icon.
The fact that Google gives such low priority to updating toolbar PR suggests that, according to Google's own user research, the toolbar "fuel gauge" isn't a biggie with the typical user. It's just one more gimmick to entice people into downloading and installing the toolbar.
The fact that Google gives such low priority to updating toolbar PR suggests that, according to Google's own user research, the toolbar "fuel gauge" isn't a biggie with the typical user.
I haven't had the benefit of seeing this research documentation or statements relating to it. Adam L. stated they don't want to increase the rate PR is updated because they don't want people checking it too often, and they want to make it more difficult for webmasters to manipulate. I agree with that but the primary focus, as usual, is on the small percentage of webmasters not the other 99.9%.
It's just one more gimmick to entice people into downloading and installing the toolbar.
It's a gimmick which misleads consumers into a false sense of security. Adam L. admitted it is used/abused not only by webmasters but also in ways that run contrary to the interests of searchers.
It's a gimmick which misleads consumers into a false sense of security.
I don't think the average consumer pays much attention the toolbar PR gauge, but if I were asked for my vote, I wouldn't object to:
(1) Getting rid of the PR gauge altogether, or...
(2) Making it a toolbar option instead of a default.
My preference would be (1), if only because it might help to reduce Webmasters' obsession with PageRank.
Adam has invited suggestions, and is presumably going to listen to our ideas. It would be nice if we could focus more of our collective energy and wisdom on how Google could help both webmasters and ordinary users (rather than just endlessly debating the flaws of TBPR -- both real and imagined).
Relegate the PR gauge to "option" status (as was suggested earlier), and have several different gauge options that users could choose according to what they thought might be important:
- Toolbar PR gauge
- Age of site gauge
- "TrustRank" gauge
It would be nice if we could focus more of our collective energy and wisdom on how Google could help both webmasters
..........................
- Toolbar PR gauge
- Age of site gauge
- "TrustRank" gauge
I sent Adam a message 3 posts into the original thread with a short list of gauges I'd include... these included your current suggestions too.
...
We had a good laugh.
...
[/irony]
I sent Adam a message 3 posts into the original thread with a short list of gauges I'd include... these included your current suggestions too.
Too bad you didn't post your list in the thread, but in any case, it's nice to hear that we're on the same wavelength. :-)
to find, for example, if they would be worthy link partners
Do you really think Google would be interested in providing tools to make it easier for people to chase strong links?
Do you really think Google would be interested in providing tools to make it easier for people to chase strong links?
Hasn't Google already done that, for better or for worse, with the existing toolbar? (If Google really wanted to discourage link-chasing, it could do away with "toolbar PR" and keep everybody guessing.)
Hasn't Google already done that, for better or for worse, with the existing toolbar? (If Google really wanted to discourage link-chasing, it could do away with "toolbar PR" and keep everybody guessing.)
Uh, no. Read Machiavelli lately?
Every good "big brother"-type knows that
mis-information is always a better FUD agent than no information.
:mutters: which is probably why there are various laws addressing it.:mutters:
Do you really think Google would be interested in providing tools to make it easier for people to chase strong links?
......................................
[edited by: Reno at 12:40 pm (utc) on Aug. 19, 2007]
The public at large would be better off if it went away and more natural linking might return to the web, like before PR screwed it up. Everybody wins.
The public at large would be better off if it went away and more natural linking might return to the web, like before PR screwed it up.
It's probably too late for that: The link-exchange crowd would just look at search rankings instead of the PR gauge before spamming potential "link partners."
...The link-exchange crowd would just look at search rankings instead of the PR gauge before spamming potential "link partners."
Of course, following links in serps pages and links from non-obscure pages is how people generally find things on the web in the first place, so you might say that "looking at search rankings" is already happening, and undoubtedly started to happen prior to Google.
Using rankings or PageRank as your sole reference point would be a bad strategy for link building, but it is a natural component of the process.
[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 10:56 pm (utc) on Aug. 19, 2007]
mis-information is always a better FUD agent than no information.
Exactly, there are three types of information out there; good, bad and none. The worst of the three is bad, and when you look at that tool bar PR, that’s what your getting; bad information (and thats by design).
Adam asked for constructive suggestions, and my suggestion would be to provide accurate PR information through the tool bar. PR is a classic, core part of what Google provides its users and there’s nothing good about deliberately destroying that. People are suggesting in this thread to just get rid of it, well the only reason to suggest that is because it’s pretty worthless right now as any sort of indicator.
All this talk about it fueling the link buying industry is non sense. People are going to buy and sell links no matter what. All that will change is the scale by which cost is gauged. In stead of PR 5, it will be a, “top 20 ranking with 8,000 back links”. That trade is never going away.
Page Rank was a tremendous creation, keep it and proudly display it accurately.
Just because its there, doesn't mean you have to use it. Take it for what its worth, a slightly untrustworthy indicator. It still sends signals to look deeper into potential issues. I check pagerank on shopping sites ALL THE TIME. It's a show of trust. It doesn't mean that if they don't have PR I'm not going to buy, but it does help.
It also gives you a quick indication of the health of a site. I have friends ask me for my quick opinion on their company site for their offline business, and the first thing I look at is Pagerank. It just gives me an idea before I dive deeper.
And finally, I can't understand why someone would say that Pagerank doesn't matter. I think I heard that on that SEO 101 class on wmr. If PR doesn't matter, give me a Toolbar PR6 link and I'll give you a PR1 link in return. That talk is nonsense.
Yowsers I just read that and had to comment. I'm sure the natural linking of the web was more a function of less sites in the index. Nobody knew any better back then. Going back to the 'glory days' is probably something MC would like, but its gone man....let go!
You can take away the toolbar or any other operators the search engines provide and things won't change...people will evolve.
Things have moved on; and there's no going back! ... Let It Go ;)
[edited by: Quadrille at 6:48 pm (utc) on Aug. 23, 2007]
This discussion is irrelevant to 99% of Google users - who are neither SEOs nor webmasters. They don't care how often the toolbar updates.
I don't see anyone demanding the Alexa or the Compete bars to go away.
Let's get this straight. Google really doesn't care about SEOs or webmasters beyond helping them to build Google-compliant websites that satisfy Google users. Its not about you - it's all about Google. Sure they rather not have SEOs throwing rocks at them, but that's inavoidable, considering SEOs want to manipulate results while Google wants to keep its results under its own control.
So it really doesn't matter to Google if SEOs want the toolbar PR to go away. Whatever problems the toolbar causes for SEOs/webmasters isn't Google's problem.
[edited by: Halfdeck at 3:30 am (utc) on Aug. 24, 2007]
