Comments on: Who will clean up Google’s mess?

By: Shower Caddy

Shower Caddy — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:55:59 +0000

link popularity is very important for any website to rank good in search engines.’;

By: WiiKey

WiiKey — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:31:49 +0000

Hey this is a chill looking blog, I was just looking for this last night. Glad I finally found what I needed.

By: Oyunlar

Oyunlar — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:32:15 +0000

THANKS…

By: Product of the System » Blog Archive » Just A Quick Update

Product of the System » Blog Archive » Just A Quick Update — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:44:22 +0000

[...] way of “brainwashing” and “propaganda.” I see an opportunity for someone to clean up Google’s mess and provide good results the Google did back in their first few years. My first round submission [...]

By: puravida

puravida — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:27:51 +0000

I should append my last comment and say they “would” still be some of the best but I had to turn off the crawler due to the lack of horsepower on that dedicated server. But, it’s still a good proof of concept.

http://www.neobus.com
http://www.neobus.net

By: puravida

puravida — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:25:06 +0000

Hi Mark,

I totally agree and I did just that. I built a proprietary crawler, search engine, and ranking algorithm. My results are some of the best (although veeeery slow), but you need money or connections or both (in Google’s case) to really make an impact.

Thanks for the comment!

By: Mark Montgomery

Mark Montgomery — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:20:42 +0000

Well for crying out loud!!!!!

This sounds like the perfect opportunity for someone to build a search engine based on relevancy……

How about being able to do a search with ranking based on the most number of links (paid) (unpaid)

How about a search based on ranking due to traffic?

How about a search based on only the newest sites on the net in the last 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, etc., etc., etc. (that’ll get google googling, yahoo yahooing, and go going)

How about a search based only on actual total number of relevant keywords? or content? or whatever?

How about a search based on all of these items with the search engine determining the weight.

In other words, lets not gripe about how bad it is. Let’s create something people want.

And thats about all I’ve got to say about that!

Mark J. Montgomery

p.s. http:///www.largeincomes.info

By: Phil

Phil — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 04:52:50 +0000

The flipside of the argument is that Google’s authoritarian decision evens out the playing field for the little guys. Big companies or thosewith money to burn will have to go out and build backlinks the good old fashioned way– by hand or semi-automatic software which requires a person doing some actual work.

Never seemed fair to me that someone with a lot of money could buy PR& or PR8 backlinks and get themselves extremely well0ranked.

The Internet is suopposed to help the little guy make money. Not just the rich and powerful.

Google is a bully, to be sure. But I think this time they may have accidentally done a good thing.

That’s my two cents.

By: puravida

puravida — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:45:49 +0000

Sorry to hear that, Pete. I totally agree. I think they should spend less effort trying to change human nature (i.e. to make a buck) and more effort on a better algorithm.

By: Pete White

Pete White — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:57:16 +0000

Very good post, I recently lost all my page ranks because I used PayPerPost – who are Google to play god over what I post on my site.