Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
Forum Moderators: mack
I mostly found the short output quite irrelevant and disapointing but maybe others can tell more.
From where I stand I am very uncertain of where they are going with this...maybe was just a glitch.
In the first two pages we do not need to see:
on and on and on...
Also, and probably more significant, is, assuming these are the results, MSN has absolutely no idea how to judge authority/score at all anymore. Looking at the serps, it's just...strange?
If I had to guess, I would say that instead of looking for signals of quality and relevance, they have turned up the filters. The end result is they remove some sites of lower quality, but seem to somehow miss nearly every decent site.
Ah well, one step forward, 40 steps back :)
For reference, the other three rules are:
I won't talk about the competitors; there are already enough people talking about them.
I won't talk about someone's specific site. People deserve their privacy, and even if they don't mind, it's really boring reading about someone's specific problem when you can't see the URL they're talking about.
I won't reveal trade secrets or anything else that might help people unfairly optimize their sites for MSN Search.
Hope that seems reasonable to you. Thanks for being interested in MSN Search!
Anyway, you are without doubt, by far, the most open and...well...easy going of the seo reps (if any are even left?). I for one appreciate this, particluarly coming from a company of your size. Keep up the good work and dont let the critcism get to you (you should read the google forum, lol)...
Steveb: Thanks. I guess the best spin I can put on it is that if we're not making a few mistakes, we're probably not trying hard enough to improve.
By the way, this was another case where Webmaster World was the first place we saw a problem reported. Our hats are off to you folks and your eagle eyes. :-)
You guys playing around with different indexes?