18 replies to this topic

[compar]

I think I have noticed a real trend in this forum. I would be interested to know if anybody else has seen it. The trend I talk about is the absolute and complete defense of everything and anything that Google does. Any discussion of potential improvements or variations in the way that Google presently operates will be immediately attacked and denounce.

Google is perfect and anybody who suggests differently is either stupid, selfish or otherwise an ignoramus. I guess we have arrived at Nirvanna. No improvement is possible. The only thing left to do is silence the heretics.

[qwerty]

There's plenty of room for improvement in Google, and it's clear that they're working on it. It'll never be "perfect," because we'll never all have the same opinion of what perfect means. For me, it's a search engine that puts all of my sites at the top of the SERPs. After all, my sites are all perfect

I do a search on Google and see plenty of pages that clearly don't belong in the SERPs getting absolutely great ranks. There are irrelevant sites, there are sites that obviously break the TOS, there are sites that aren't mine.

But I have to accept the facts that Google is the best we've got so far and they don't work for me. Google's job is to get the best results for searchers, not for webmasters or SEOs, so their priorities aren't the same as mine.

[Jill]

Wow, only a few weeks old and already we have a trend!

Bob, guess what? Not everyone will agree with everything you post? Some of us will disagree with lots of what you post (and what others post).

That's life in a forum.

However, I take a huge exception with you claiming that anyone is calling you names. Please show me where anyone called you "stupid, selfish or otherwise an ignoramus" and I will immediately delete it.

Obviously you see things different than I do. So what? Nobody's called you name, and I for one would appreciate you not insinuating that anyone has.

This forum will not be a place where name calling is allowed. So if you have any specific instances of this, just let me know, even if it's me doing the name calling.

Disagreeing isn't calling names. Not in my book.

As to the question of Google being perfect, no, it's not perfect. But it's a lot closer to perfection than the other search engines. From what I see of Google, I just love the way they run things. I love their philosophy. As long as they continue to do things because they are the right things to do, as opposed to because they are the things that will make them the most money, I will continue to support them when I can. When they stop doing that, you'll certainly hear me complaining as loud as the next guy.

But right now, they're doing a damn good job. Not perfect, but damn good.

They don't work for SEOs. Their listings aren't for the good of Webmasters. They work for the searcher. As soon as you think otherwise, you will think they're trying to screw you or whatever. It's not about you. It's not about SEOs. It's about the searcher.

Jill

[compar]

Google's job is to get the best results for searchers, not for webmasters or SEOs, so their priorities aren't the same as mine.

Have you ever heard of the win win strategy? If as you say Google's job is to get the best results for the searcher, why don't they consider doing it by sharing with the web masters what they deem to be the elements of a site that give these best results?

Google above all other sites has emphasized popularity as judged by the number and supposedly the quality of backward links to a web site. This has spawned link farms and a whole industry of spammy link building strategies. Google has done nothing to stop it. In fact their refusal -- I don't know if it is a concious refusal or not -- to rank links by relevancy or importance in their link search just perpetuates the perception that any link is a good link and the more the better.

[Pets]

When I am trying to find something I have loads of options of where to look. Where do I go? Usually Google. Why? Well, quite simply - I almost always find what I'm looking for, easily.

Is Google perfect? No.
Is Google the best there is? IMO, at this point in time, Yes.
Will it stay this way? Almost certainly, No.
Will I switch to another Engine when it becomes better than Google? In half a heart-beat.
I don't use Google because it's Google, I use it because I hate wasting time trying to find things.
When another engine becomes better than Google, there will be a HUGE exodus to the other engine. Included in the group who switch will be most of the present Googlites.

Do I love Google? No, I love information and efficiency.

[Scottie]

Any discussion of potential improvements or variations in the way that Google presently operates will be immediately attacked and denounce.

When you make a case against Google that makes business sense, I'll be right behind you. So far, your arguments don't stand up. I've seen no one attack or denounce you; I have seen people who disagree.

The only person I've seen making wild statements is someone who thinks ranking backwards links is akin to selling children into slavery... and thinks that webmasters should be treated like children...

You guys are so fast to justify and defend everything that Google does I think if I told you they sold their daughters into slavery you would instantly come back and tell me "so they should and that's a good thing IMO".

Would you be prepared to ground your chidren when the do something wrong -- in Google's case suspend or drop your web site listing -- but never tell or reward them when they do something correctly?

I'm not sure why you feel you are the voice of reason and we are the oppressors; so far everyone has been polite and direct while responding to you.

There are other forums that like Google-bashing for no reason; I'm sure you'd feel more at home in that type of environment.

[Jill]

Have you ever heard of the win win strategy? If as you say Google's job is to get the best results for the searcher, why don't they consider doing it by sharing with the web masters what they deem to be the elements of a site that give these best results?

Okay, Bob. Now you have 3 different threads all going on about the same subject.

I'm going to have to merge these into one in this case. If you'd like to discuss the Google-loving mods in this thread, then let's discuss that.

If you want to discuss your problem with Google not giving you their algorithm on a silver platter, then please do it in one of the other 2 threads where you are already talking about this. There's no reason for three threads, and I will have to remove them, otherwise.

Jill

[Jill]

I'm not sure why you feel you are the voice of reason and we are the oppressors; so far everyone has been polite and direct while responding to you.

Don't forget where he called us polyanna's. Debra (Magnolia) didn't like that one. (I didn't know what it meant, so I didn't care!)

Jill

[qwerty]

Have you ever heard of the win win strategy? If as you say Google's job is to get the best results for the searcher, why don't they consider doing it by sharing with the web masters what they deem to be the elements of a site that give these best results?

We, the webmasters, are not to be trusted by the search engines. The only way there can be a win-win strategy for Google, searchers, and webmasters/SEOs, is if we decide to become complete and utter altruists.

For example: I get hired by a company to bring in more traffic and convert more business for them. While I'm doing my research on their competition (I know, Jill isn't big on competition research, but I find it useful) I happen to locate a site that is simply magnificent. It provides all the information anyone searching on this subject could ever ask for. It's easy to navigate. It's a miracle.

But my job is to put my client's site above this jewel. And if Google shares all their secrets, I'm sure I'll be able to do that. Why would Google or its users want me to do that? This site is the best one out there, and deserves to be at the top of the SERPs because it is the most relevant, but if I know everything about the algo and can push it down a notch or two, don't you think I'm going to do that?

[compar]

When I am trying to find something I have loads of options of where to look. Where do I go? Usually Google. Why? Well, quite simply - I almost always find what I'm looking for, easily.

Yes and so do I. Google is without a doubt IMHO the best and most relevant search engine available today. The question I posed in this thread is why everytime that I has dared to suggest that they might do something differently, particularly in regard to the mania they have spawned about the importance of links do the moderators generally jump all over the suggestion and defend Google to the hilt?

I don't believe I am alone in this. I can't quote chapter and verse but I have seen responses to other contributors that also will not breach any criticism or suggetsion of change in regard to Google.

Why can't we get a discussion going about potential changes and improvement? This is a large and incredibly successful forum thanks in large part to the excellent work and high standard of integrity that Jill Whalen has brought to the SEO profession.

If we could come up with a slate of recommended changes I'm sure Google would be interested in hearing about these changes and might even incorporate some of them. But my disappointment is that rather than encourage and participate in the development of such a list of improvements the moderators of this list normally treat any suggestion of change as dissension and heresy.

[Scottie]

The question I posed in this thread is why everytime that I has dared to suggest that they might do something differently, particularly in regard to the mania they have spawned about the importance of links do the moderators generally jump all over the suggestion and defend Google to the hilt?

Where have we jumped all over you and where have we defended Google? We are merely giving our point of view, the same as you.

Why can't we get a discussion going about potential changes and improvement?

Sounds great! However, if we don't agree with what you think is an improvement, we will say so. No one is saying Google couldn't be improved but I'm sure everyone has different ideas about what is an improvement.

But my disappointment is that rather than encourage and participate in the development of such a list of improvements the moderators of this list normally treat any suggestion of change as dissension and heresy.

You have quite a flair for dramatics and overstatement. Please quote the "dissention and heresy" posts that moderators of this forum have made. We need to stop doing that.

[schecky]

Have you ever heard of the win win strategy? If as you say Google's job is to get the best results for the searcher, why don't they consider doing it by sharing with the web masters what they deem to be the elements of a site that give these best results?

What about people like myself and Jill who've spent close to nine years learning how all this stuff works. Where's our reward for learning the skills and gaining the knowledge we have accumalated and shared with SEOs for years? If google gave the algo on a silver platter every envelope pusher out there could push that much further with less risk! They don't do it for the same reason they keep the content guidelines vague. If they weren't vague spam would quickly get out of control.

[qwerty]

I don't worship Google. I find it a useful tool, and because I recognize its position of power, I work to make sure my sites perform well on it.

It's clear that Google is interested in improving its performance. They have that form one can fill out if a search brings up unsatisfactory results, and they're constantly looking for ways to improve the algo. So it's hardly heretical to criticize Google, or to make suggestions on how to make it better. But that doesn't make anyone who disagrees with your opinion of how it can be improved a Pollyanna.

ALERT:
I remember a great cartoon from about 20 years ago by Roz Chast called "Pollyanna in Hell". In one of the frames, she's walking by a pit of fire and says something like, "I sure won't need any sweaters."

[Jill]

The problem, Bob, is that we would not agree on the changes that are necessary. And also, that google would only be interested in changes that effect their search results or their bottom line.

Personally, I don't want to know google's algorithm, and I don't care how they count backward links, or in what order they show them. If/when I do care, I go and figure it out. I don't wait for them to tell me.

To me, it doesn't sound like you want Google to change, you just want them to do your job for you, or tell you how you can make your site rank higher. If you're having problems with that, then it's up to you to figure out what to do about it. Google's not gonna tell you, nor should they.

[compar]

There are other forums that like Google-bashing for no reason; I'm sure you'd feel more at home in that type of environment.

See, there you've done it again. I'm not bashing Google. I love Google. I tell my SEO clients that Google is the only Search Engine worth worrying about. Google is wonderful! Google is brilliant! Google is the only search engine I use. Google is a phenomena! They stand so far above all other search engines there isn't even a comparison.

When will you and Jill and others read what say and quit thinking I'm bashing Google. I'm not bashing them. I'm only suggesting that as wonderful as they are there might be something they could do to be even better.

I believe that with the place of leadership and dominance they have earned and enjoy comes certain responsibilities. I think that they are in large part responsible for what I refer to as the link mania. I think they could quickly and easily correct this situation. But all you guys and gals continue to blame the problem on everybody else and none of you will even discuss how Google might contribute to ending this mania.

One more time! I'm not a Google basher. I am a Google cheerleader and supporter and advocate. I would just like to see a great institution get even better. This forum could contribute to that, but not as long as you interpet any suggesting of change as Google bashing.