Google SEO versus Reverse Engineering Google; what's the difference

[bumpski]

Is there a difference between Google Search Engine Optimization and Reverse Engineering Google's search?

Perhaps a discussion and opinions?

Many at WebmasterWorld appear to be actively promoting Reverse Engineering of Google's algorithm (REG); admittedly REG is a component of SEO, but where does one draw the line?
SEO can certainly be achieved without REG.
Tedster seemed to feel that REG was pretty much dead, due to the complexity and dynamics of Google's algo.

http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4425773.htm
Tedster:
"Gone are the days where we could build a checklist and trust the tradition of analysis that had been dome for us by others. Why is that? The algo is so complex that we cannot effectively test the whole thing, reverse engineer it, in other words. How can we when every market niche, every kind of site, even every type of keyword may be treated differently!"

And Google of course says REG is against its TOS:

http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/
Google:
"You may not copy, modify, distribute, sell, or lease any part of our Services or included software, nor may you reverse engineer or attempt to extract the source code of that software, unless laws prohibit those restrictions or you have our written permission."

Poorly worded but one gets their drift!

[goodroi]

Thank goodness Google guidelines are just that - guidelines and not law. We each need to apply common sense and decide for ourselves how best to interpret and follow (or not follow) these guidelines.

According to the above Google statement, you are in violation if you copy their search results to create a ranking report. I think most white hat SEO people would say that a ranking report is acceptable.

I think Ted's comments are still valid. Many people are looking for a short & easy checklist to follow & succeed because we were able to do that in the past. That time has come and gone. Now you are often better rewarded with an understanding of the sophistication of Google. Taking a more holistic approach to internet marketing (not just SEO) would probably better serve most people. To better understand the situation so you can make an informed decision you need to educate yourself. Doing tests, some version of reverse engineering, or other hands-on exercises can help educate you. You need to educate yourself somehow so you can make wise decisions.

If you blindly follow Google's instructions, you will probably not be happy. Applying some common sense and looking at the spirit behind the guidelines instead of the literal writing might be a better idea.

[ronin]

There are some (myself included) who consider SEO as a subset of Information Studies - as a library discipline. We are not SEO-ing for Google or real-world search engines but for The Search Engine as a Platonic Form. It is not our job to find out what Google is looking for and provide it, it is our job to ascertain as intelligently as possible what Google ought to be looking for and provide that. Assuming we get that part largely right (and that's the trick), how long it then takes for Google to catch up is Google's problem, not ours.

Then there are those who purely consider SEO as an arms race in which Players game Search Engines. They are Algo Chasers.

I imagine, between these idealist and materialist perspectives, there are many inbetween.

[EditorialGuy]

"Reverse engineering" may be a subset of SEO, but that doesn't mean SEO has to involve reverse engineering.

The term "SEO" is broad, while "reverse engineering Google search" is more specific.

[seoskunk]

Its a #*$! phrase made by desperate people.

If you really could reverse engineer the algos then you wouldn't advertise it

[brotherhood of LAN]

In reference to Tedster's quote, I believe he's referring to a time where you could single out a specific variable and test it and within a few days you could 'measure' the test on Google. Due to the increase in variables and a deliberate randomness in cause and effect introduced by Google, it's not as easy to do that.

I like ronin's interpretation, well put.