Comments on: Parable of the single sheep – Or How Google is destroying the internet, and nobody seems to know. http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/ Building Amazing Webapps Tue, 07 Sep 2010 19:52:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Andy Freeman http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-471 Andy Freeman Mon, 12 May 2008 12:49:25 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-471 <p>The author seems to think that the purpose of the web is to serve webmasters' interests. It's not. It's to serve users interests. Webmasters, and google, make money when they do so, and don't when they don't. If you think that a different way of reranking sites would better serve user interests, build a search engine and let's see if users agree. If they do, you get rich. If they don't, you've lost money/time, which is as it should be.</p> <p>Note that the rule is missing some essential details that might make it unworkable.</p> <p>What about new sites? Is it acceptable to rank them higher than old ones? If so, the right thing for a webmaster to do is not improve an existing site but make a new one. If not, improving a site can't result in higher rankings unless some "court" approves moving it up. How does that help users?</p> <p>Why would I, a user, prefer a search engine that can't reorder how it ranks two different sites?</p> <p>BTW - Google will return site A before site B for some queries and site B before site A for other queries. Which order do you want to preserve? Both?</p> The author seems to think that the purpose of the web is to serve webmasters’ interests. It’s not. It’s to serve users interests. Webmasters, and google, make money when they do so, and don’t when they don’t. If you think that a different way of reranking sites would better serve user interests, build a search engine and let’s see if users agree. If they do, you get rich. If they don’t, you’ve lost money/time, which is as it should be.

Note that the rule is missing some essential details that might make it unworkable.

What about new sites? Is it acceptable to rank them higher than old ones? If so, the right thing for a webmaster to do is not improve an existing site but make a new one. If not, improving a site can’t result in higher rankings unless some “court” approves moving it up. How does that help users?

Why would I, a user, prefer a search engine that can’t reorder how it ranks two different sites?

BTW – Google will return site A before site B for some queries and site B before site A for other queries. Which order do you want to preserve? Both?

]]> By: shabda http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-466 shabda Sun, 11 May 2008 16:39:14 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-466 <p>Paulo: But is “lawful judgment of his Peers” really possible on the web? Can you select a jury of other webamsters, and make their decision binding on both the SE and webmaster. Difficult proposition at best!</p> Paulo: But is “lawful judgment of his Peers” really possible on the web? Can you select a jury of other webamsters, and make their decision binding on both the SE and webmaster. Difficult proposition at best!

]]> By: Paulo Köch http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-465 Paulo Köch Sun, 11 May 2008 14:42:25 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-465 <p>Removing the "lawful judgment of his Peers" from your proclamation hinders its efficiency. Peers are the ones who serve and must be served. Laws only states the collective will of the Peers. Even in real life, we aspire for this to be true.</p> Removing the “lawful judgment of his Peers” from your proclamation hinders its efficiency. Peers are the ones who serve and must be served. Laws only states the collective will of the Peers. Even in real life, we aspire for this to be true.

]]> By: shabda http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-470 shabda Fri, 09 May 2008 16:35:41 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-470 <p>vinny: That girl analogy is interesting. Gives me idea for another parable.</p> <p>Azhar: Although I belive that monopoly in place is bad, this article is not about monopoly.</p> <p>Anatoly: I dont write well enough to make my point with just the parable. Someday, someday!</p> vinny: That girl analogy is interesting. Gives me idea for another parable.

Azhar: Although I belive that monopoly in place is bad, this article is not about monopoly.

Anatoly: I dont write well enough to make my point with just the parable. Someday, someday!

]]> By: Anatoly http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-469 Anatoly Fri, 09 May 2008 16:01:26 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-469 <p>A metaphor, like a joke, is no good if you have to explain it. The sheep thing just confused me.</p> <p>How do Foobr'ers find a sheep in the tall grass? Very Satisfying.</p> A metaphor, like a joke, is no good if you have to explain it. The sheep thing just confused me.

How do Foobr’ers find a sheep in the tall grass? Very Satisfying.

]]> By: Azhar http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-468 Azhar Fri, 09 May 2008 14:19:44 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-468 <p>Nice Article and very true. Google is becoming too much of monopoly. I think search should be open.</p> Nice Article and very true. Google is becoming too much of monopoly. I think search should be open.

]]> By: Vinny http://uswaretech.com/blog/2008/05/parable-of-the-single-sheep-or-how-google-is-destroying-the-internet-and-nobody-seems-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-467 Vinny Fri, 09 May 2008 13:58:35 +0000 http://42topics.com/blog/?p=54#comment-467 <p>Agreed!</p> <p>You can build up a great legitimate site, using the rules that everyone follows today, and then in months from now the rules will change and you will be labeled "Spam". </p> <p>Then you'll be devastated and heart-broken and good money will be gone.</p> <p>OR, you can just build-up a spam site (hundreds or even thousands of them) knowing they will eventually be banned and you won't be heart-broken at all because you'll be expecting it.</p> <p>But in the meantime you've moved on to the next 100 or so spam sites and you're making ok money just churning them out.</p> <p>Its the same logic on why you should only go after girls that are way out of your league. Because then you KNOW you're going to get dumped eventually, and its no surprise.</p> Agreed!

You can build up a great legitimate site, using the rules that everyone follows today, and then in months from now the rules will change and you will be labeled “Spam”.

Then you’ll be devastated and heart-broken and good money will be gone.

OR, you can just build-up a spam site (hundreds or even thousands of them) knowing they will eventually be banned and you won’t be heart-broken at all because you’ll be expecting it.

But in the meantime you’ve moved on to the next 100 or so spam sites and you’re making ok money just churning them out.

Its the same logic on why you should only go after girls that are way out of your league. Because then you KNOW you’re going to get dumped eventually, and its no surprise.

]]>