Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
I was editing to try and give a better example, but thanks for reading the fine print tedster ... I think often people look at the results Google provides with a short-term, narrow view, rather than trying to figure out what their long-term sustainable plan might be, and imo you really have to have differences present for an algo to 'learn' what is 'better' or 'worse', especially on a query dependent basis.
Hasn't there been a post somewhere by a Googler about the recovery process ...
... As a website is updated, recrawled, reindexed, and with that, the site's signals reassessed, our algorithms will take those changes into account and treat the website accordingly.
That process is usually not something that takes place overnight ... it takes time for us to recrawl the pages, the bigger the site, the longer it will take. .... Sometimes, even after recrawling parts of a site, our algorithms will need a bit of time to confirm that the site has really changed for good.
All of this can and will take time. Personally, I'd recommend not waiting to see if a single, small change will make a difference, our algorithms rarely have a "one-track-mind," they take many factors into account. ...
... our algorithms rarely have a "one-track-mind," they take many factors into account.
The quality scoring assigned by Panda seems to be extremely sticky and for now, at least, almost impossible to change in a dramatic way. Panda is not acting like a traditional "penalty" at all, and it may be a mistake to think of it in those terms.
.. As a website is updated, recrawled, reindexed, and with that, the site's signals reassessed, our algorithms will take those changes into account and treat the website accordingly
I'd say Google is studying USER behavior most of all
but then within 24 hours of making some substantial content changes on March 11, it was hit with a drop in ranking
There is something quite "non-standard" in this period that follows the update - our old expectations are being dramatically disappointed. I'm thinking this reflects how radically different this new algorithm is, as well as how new it is.
[edited by: TheMadScientist at 6:37 pm (utc) on Mar 20, 2011]