Could SEs give choice of two algorithms?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
I'm just curious what would have to happen if search engines wanted to give
you an on-the-spot choice between searching by, for example, (1) whatever
Google's present combo is between PageRank and [whatever else] and, say, (2)
a search that was 25% Google's current link popularity and 75% keyword
relevancy. :o)

In other words, would they have to get like one extra laptop or would they
need thousands more servers? I'm exaggerating but I have no idea how these
things work obviously.


Re: Could SEs give choice of two algorithms?

Joe Stalin Tea Club wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

well you can kind of do that through the allin* operators. Perhaps an
interface like MSN Search's sliders could work for this?


Re: Could SEs give choice of two algorithms?


David, this is EXACTLY the sort of thing we've been praying for. I just got
this news message and I haven't had time to experiment with this SE (also
I'm assuming it's still in the experimental stages), but I'm hoping this
ends up working, and I'm hoping the average citizen has enough sense to
realize how great something like this could be. I use Google for 99% of my
overall searches now (because most of the time I don't have a problem with
looking at results 1 through 400), 60% of my initial searches, and I even
wear Jackie's silly Google t-shirt, but there are many types of searches
where the link popularity concept just doesn't work.

If I'm searching for (just as an example of how popularity works well),
something to help me understand PageRank, which is a concept more than a few
weeks old and something everyone knows about, and I search using the
exact-phrase "PageRank Explained," I think that link popularity is GREAT,
since I'd guess most people linking to this page know basic SEO and would
link only to a PageRank Explained page that is accurate and "graspable" to
everyone including people like me, whose intellectual highpoint of the day
is watching Robocop 3 for the twentieth time.

However, if I'm searching for a hot chick few people know by name, Megan
Leitch, for example (the adult version of Fox Mulder's sister), whom many
people "know" about but not **as** "Megan Leitch," link popularity means
**** all, for the following reasons:

(1) Fifty people on the planet know her by name, and only three of them have
websites with pages devoted strictly to her.

(2) Out of these three, **three** are probably students who have forgotten
how to access their webspace and add links to other sites. Or, the e-mail
"contact me" addresses these three have on their sites are long void. Or,
possibly, the only existing site on the internet devoted strictly to this
talented and beautiful Canadian actress was created by a couple of clowns
with annoying personalities and no interest in style or aesthetics;
therefore, as a whole, an unlikely candidate for linkage.

Our ****ing mother wouldn't even link to us.

(3) There are MANY pages mentioning Mega Leitch only once, pages that are
part of larger, popular websites with high PR, although these sites' "Megan
"Leitch" pages are visited once every ten years.

HOWEVER, I should add that I'm not complaining and I realize there are more
factors than PageRank involved here ... and I KNOW this because we always do
acceptably well with our Megan Leitch pages and only two X-Files people link
to us, Sweet Baby Jesus bless their forgiving hearts.

Jill Hennessy is another story. X-Files people tend to be fairly
open-minded; Jill Hennessy people tend to hate us as much as everyone else.

What's my point?

"There ain't no point, Eriksson. I'm simply trying to illuminate the terrain
in which we currently find ourselves deployed. You don't mind that, do you?
And if you do, F*** you. ARE YOU ON MY FREQUENCY?!?!?"

David Rabe, Casualties of War (
( product link shortened)

Anyway thanks for letting us know about this MSN thing.


On 12/1/04 4:02 AM, in article
41ad86ed$0$31392$, "David George"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Site Timeline