Site Reference Forums

http://www.site-reference.com/articles/ … lated.html

Kim, Kim, oh Kimmy….. I am glad it wasn’t a paperback as I am trying to be as environmentally friendly as possible.

Well gang, this is the second edition, that I know of, on this topic for Ms Roach. While I commend her ability to stay conscious long enough to disseminate a G patent, there are far better ones released this year that CAN ACTUALLY HELP the SEO provider and enthusiast.

At least she has the all important caveat with G patents (reminds me of DC Watching);

“However, we must keep in mind that just because a patent has been applied for or granted, the search engines may or may not implement the patent within their primary search results.”

That is probably the most important lines in the entire piece.

The Document in questions is named; System and method for supporting editorial opinion in the ranking of search results and can be found http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Pars … PN/7096214

Right away, for me, the sheer CASH OUTLAY to implement this system in a complete or realistic way would easily signal IF this is ever used. With some estimated 24 Billion pages and who know how many websites, this approach outlined in this brief would show up on the Bottom Line (it is a public company ya know).

Keep in mind folks that some patents are merely a smoke screen for the competition or to ‘beat them to the punch’. Many a large corporation will buy up a competing technology merely to bury it  (Orion maybe?)

In the end I don’t even want to get into this patent because there are those in the Search World, not that I am saying Kim is one of them, that latched onto this story a month or so back because of the SPETACULAR nature of it. A Human Editor enhanced Google. It was great for ‘Link Bait’. Far and wide SEOs were in a tizzy and so it worked just great for many promoters. If this is a second kick at the PR can or just Kin being interested, I shall not judge.


The extent of the GRANDEUR can be seen in her statement;

“However, Google's most recent patent application shows a shift from focusing on algorithm-based changes to the integration of a human editorial process.”

WHAAATTTTT? At least read the document a little better there KR. I have poured over this thing at least 10 times in the last month and it is merely a proposed augmentation and tighter version of the Yahoo ‘Trust Rank’ theories. It is NOT a shift in the focus from the ALGO to HUMANS.

How about;

For the most part, search engine algorithms have reached their peak. We've known for quite some time now that an algorithm-based search engine can never permanently deliver excellent results.

HUUUH? So what about the other 20 or so patents based around tweaking the Algo that came out this year? This ONE document supersedes them? Jeezz…..


I could really go on as we all know around here. This is a RANT that is getting to be a thorn in my side, Shameless Fear Mongering ot Misinformation for personal gain. Get a Job at CNN folks…..

If you want some reading that will REALLY “give us clues about what the search engines are looking for in a website.”.

For starters (2006 stuff …though there is some good 05 as well) Patents on;

Authoritative Document Handling
Dealing with intro-text
Document structure based results-2
Geo-indexing (2 actually)
Phrase-based searching ( my personal FAV lately...and they say LSI isn’t in the main Algo..)

As you can see, there are some other VERY interesting Patents this year that probably better “give us clues about what the search engines are looking for in a website.”. It seems that folks would rather talk about the racy and potentially BUZZ causing topics.

I hope this article DOES create awareness, but I hope it’s that people read more of these technical documents for themselves and not ready a ONE OFF article as the TRUTH. Standard practice in the SEO world

Last edited by thegyspsy (2006-09-25 09:03:00)