Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!


Sponsored Content

 

 
 

Photo
- - - - -

Help Me To Understand Google


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#31 lepp

lepp

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 06 February 2004 - 03:29 PM

Just want to add a "me too" to this thread.

First the good news with Gladys - our prime keyword suddenly jumped to #1 from previous top #5 to #10 and has stayed there for the past 2 weeks. (Hurray! Much jumping up & down in the office. :bubbly: ) I'm reading that there may be another update imminent so I'll keep my fingers crossed.

But other pretty important keywords disappeared and are now generally in the 40's or 50's. (Great deal of pretending this isn't happening to us :whistle:). Tried Randy's tip and checked those keywords in PostitionTech's Pure Inktomi Search and in MSN. WOW! great results - top 10 or 15.

So as per all the advice, will wait and see. Thanks for all the help.

#32 rzehr

rzehr

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts

Posted 06 February 2004 - 04:38 PM

Back to 1996?

Q: Answer me this one: what kind of a search engine returns top-10 results where key-phrase sought doesn't appear anywhere on the site, because one word of a two word phrase is nowhere to be found?

Ex: Search the big g for 'shoe lift' - note result #7 - "Ski Resort: Snowshoe Mountain West Virginia. Not only does the word 'shoe' not appear anywhere in the site, much less the page, but the word 'showshoe' is never used within a few words of the word 'lift'.

A: One written as a science project by a grade-school kid, AltaVists ca. 1996, or Google ca. 2004?

BTW, the "stemming" issue seems to be completely bogus, at least as applies to plurals - 'shoe lift' or 'heel lift' produce different garbage results from 'shoe lifts' and 'heel lifts'. If they have implemented stemming as applied to plurals, it doesn't show in the results.

I am truly appalled by the junk that Google now delivers, and there is no way on earth that the Googlies dislike what is being delivered - they willl have simulated their new algorithms to death long before releasing this code.

I simply cannot imagine what they are thinking of - Google has become the worst search site around - only inertia is slowing the flood of people who will drop it as their first choice. I particularly cannot imagine how they can be so stupid as to make this level of change while they are in the IPO pipeline - can you say "Market value dropping fast?"

#33 ephricon

ephricon

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • Location:over there -->

Posted 06 February 2004 - 04:46 PM

I am truly appalled by the junk that Google now delivers, and there is no way on earth that the Googlies dislike what is being delivered - they willl have simulated their new algorithms to death long before releasing this code.

I have to agree with you. Its one thing perhaps if this gets filtered back to normal in a few days, but if it stays like it is much more than a week or so I myself might start using something else for my searches... And I've always been quite a loyalist to Google...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users