<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google&#8217;s PageRank: A Double Edged&#160;Sword</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:43:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Cosgrove</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-780564</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Cosgrove</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:06:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-780564</guid>
		<description>Toolbar pagerank is a scale from 0-10 to represent the real pagerank  number on their back end.  How that real number is distributed on the 0-10 scale could change with every update since the gap between 3 and 4 could be completly different from 4 to 5.  It&#039;s so rough it&#039;s *nearly* meaningless to use as anything more than a hot/warm/cold gauge.  

Real pagerank is an overall, popularity/attribution score with a ton of tweaks and corrections (even before penalties) just so it can generally converge depite the fact the problem grows (new pages)  and shrinks (page not found/dropped pages) every second of every day.  Not to mention, the distribution of main to supplemental index changes all of the time and that&#039;s a pretty big factor as well that skews PageRank&#039;s efficacy.  In order to ensure that penalties appropriately affect all pages they point to, they have to be introduced during calculation which means that they offer skew to (but maybe not &quot;correction&quot; of) the algorithm.  

Page-rank in it&#039;s original form was certainly context indepenant.  I think people need to get less hung up on a 3 or 4 use it more like a general gauge to say whether you&#039;re doing better than the next guy in the SERP.  If you are, than it&#039;s likely you need other factors to bring you up.  Anchor-text, title tags, etc... still matter.

As for people getting all flustered about going up or down or getting penalized, I&#039;d make sure they understand it&#039;s not a fixed score on a fixed scale.  If you were at the bottom end of 4 and you got bumped to the top end of 3 simply because more pages are part of the equation or because where the 4 line has moved, that might not really be a big deal.  

Finally, it doesn&#039;t take a genious to realize they can spoof TBPR whenever and however they want for any targeted site if it meets their webmaster relations agenda.  There is no garauntee that Google was &quot;telling the truth&quot; about where you stand or what you pass to others when the snapshot was taken.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Toolbar pagerank is a scale from 0-10 to represent the real pagerank  number on their back end.  How that real number is distributed on the 0-10 scale could change with every update since the gap between 3 and 4 could be completly different from 4 to 5.  It&#8217;s so rough it&#8217;s *nearly* meaningless to use as anything more than a hot/warm/cold gauge.  </p>
<p>Real pagerank is an overall, popularity/attribution score with a ton of tweaks and corrections (even before penalties) just so it can generally converge depite the fact the problem grows (new pages)  and shrinks (page not found/dropped pages) every second of every day.  Not to mention, the distribution of main to supplemental index changes all of the time and that&#8217;s a pretty big factor as well that skews PageRank&#8217;s efficacy.  In order to ensure that penalties appropriately affect all pages they point to, they have to be introduced during calculation which means that they offer skew to (but maybe not &#8220;correction&#8221; of) the algorithm.  </p>
<p>Page-rank in it&#8217;s original form was certainly context indepenant.  I think people need to get less hung up on a 3 or 4 use it more like a general gauge to say whether you&#8217;re doing better than the next guy in the SERP.  If you are, than it&#8217;s likely you need other factors to bring you up.  Anchor-text, title tags, etc&#8230; still matter.</p>
<p>As for people getting all flustered about going up or down or getting penalized, I&#8217;d make sure they understand it&#8217;s not a fixed score on a fixed scale.  If you were at the bottom end of 4 and you got bumped to the top end of 3 simply because more pages are part of the equation or because where the 4 line has moved, that might not really be a big deal.  </p>
<p>Finally, it doesn&#8217;t take a genious to realize they can spoof TBPR whenever and however they want for any targeted site if it meets their webmaster relations agenda.  There is no garauntee that Google was &#8220;telling the truth&#8221; about where you stand or what you pass to others when the snapshot was taken.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lory</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-704436</link>
		<dc:creator>lory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 02:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-704436</guid>
		<description>I think more and more webmaster are affected by this change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think more and more webmaster are affected by this change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Igor The Troll</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702235</link>
		<dc:creator>Igor The Troll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 23:50:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702235</guid>
		<description>Hey I thought Danny and I are the leading men of Google Soap Opera..:)

Welcome to the show!

Like my Thai friend say, &quot;Slow but sure!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey I thought Danny and I are the leading men of Google Soap Opera..:)</p>
<p>Welcome to the show!</p>
<p>Like my Thai friend say, &#8220;Slow but sure!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Halfdeck</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702228</link>
		<dc:creator>Halfdeck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 23:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702228</guid>
		<description>&quot;we as search marketers often fuel the growth of Google dependency among those interested in search marketing.&quot;

Interested point, though Google would only care about those it can hook into using AdWords. Webmasters interested in search marketing Google can live without. All it needs are 1) searchers 2) AdWords Advertisers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;we as search marketers often fuel the growth of Google dependency among those interested in search marketing.&#8221;</p>
<p>Interested point, though Google would only care about those it can hook into using AdWords. Webmasters interested in search marketing Google can live without. All it needs are 1) searchers 2) AdWords Advertisers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Crappy worthless blog</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702102</link>
		<dc:creator>Crappy worthless blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702102</guid>
		<description>Hehe - yes I want to be numero uno for crappy worthless blog, not to forget of course; well known as that &#039;Crappy worthless Blog&#039;. Google think so, if my tbpr is  to be believed that is :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hehe &#8211; yes I want to be numero uno for crappy worthless blog, not to forget of course; well known as that &#8216;Crappy worthless Blog&#8217;. Google think so, if my tbpr is  to be believed that is :D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loren Baker, Editor</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702075</link>
		<dc:creator>Loren Baker, Editor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:29:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702075</guid>
		<description>Just curious on why he would use that title for his comment - kind of jolting. But, all comments are welcome :)

Hmmm...a bit off topic but according to Ask they ignore NoFollow completely and anchor from comments seems to work well on MSN, hence my asking &quot;Are you trying to rank high on Ask and MSN ?&quot;

Ok, on with the On Topic comments! Thanks for the participation in conversation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just curious on why he would use that title for his comment &#8211; kind of jolting. But, all comments are welcome :)</p>
<p>Hmmm&#8230;a bit off topic but according to Ask they ignore NoFollow completely and anchor from comments seems to work well on MSN, hence my asking &#8220;Are you trying to rank high on Ask and MSN ?&#8221;</p>
<p>Ok, on with the On Topic comments! Thanks for the participation in conversation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Beard</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702068</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Beard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702068</guid>
		<description>Loren

Rob is smart enough to notice that you are not dofollow anymore so it wouldn&#039;t help him, but it might be a branding exercise, or an attempt to gain more clicks.

I agree with Rob, and made that specific point before. The possible slander and defamation is in how Google describe their toolbar pagerank to their users.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Loren</p>
<p>Rob is smart enough to notice that you are not dofollow anymore so it wouldn&#8217;t help him, but it might be a branding exercise, or an attempt to gain more clicks.</p>
<p>I agree with Rob, and made that specific point before. The possible slander and defamation is in how Google describe their toolbar pagerank to their users.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loren Baker, Editor</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702063</link>
		<dc:creator>Loren Baker, Editor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:13:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702063</guid>
		<description>Are you trying to rank high on Ask and MSN for &quot;Crappy Worthless Blog&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you trying to rank high on Ask and MSN for &#8220;Crappy Worthless Blog&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kim Krause Berg (cre8pc)</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-702030</link>
		<dc:creator>Kim Krause Berg (cre8pc)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 19:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-702030</guid>
		<description>Just a minor correction...Cre8pc.com wasn&#039;t hit. It was one of my other sites, Cre8asiteforums, that was.  While TBPR began to crawl back up, I stopped checking to see what&#039;s happening.  We&#039;re choosing another revenue route. This experience just spurred me to get off my butt and get going on it :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a minor correction&#8230;Cre8pc.com wasn&#8217;t hit. It was one of my other sites, Cre8asiteforums, that was.  While TBPR began to crawl back up, I stopped checking to see what&#8217;s happening.  We&#8217;re choosing another revenue route. This experience just spurred me to get off my butt and get going on it :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Crappy worthless blog</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/comment-page-1/#comment-701994</link>
		<dc:creator>Crappy worthless blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 19:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-pagerank-a-double-edged-sword/5954/#comment-701994</guid>
		<description>Vanessa may well say it&#039;s a &#039;meaningless little made up number &#039;and whatnot, yet the reality is that Google say that TBPR is  a measure of how much importance they place on a site. When they slash ones &#039;importance&#039; then it&#039;s only natural to feel a little miffed by it all, especially if you feel it&#039;s unjustified.Whatever way you dress it up, it&#039;s an attack.

It&#039;s a classical stroke of theirs mind - hit the most vocal and send out a message. Seems to have worked too, the message being Don&#039;t do paid reviews, don&#039;t link to paid review services (nofollowed or not) and don&#039;t do paid links and perhaps most importantly  don&#039;t get caught doing so either.

Oh well, there&#039;s always the confess your sins reinclusion route I guess</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vanessa may well say it&#8217;s a &#8216;meaningless little made up number &#8216;and whatnot, yet the reality is that Google say that TBPR is  a measure of how much importance they place on a site. When they slash ones &#8216;importance&#8217; then it&#8217;s only natural to feel a little miffed by it all, especially if you feel it&#8217;s unjustified.Whatever way you dress it up, it&#8217;s an attack.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a classical stroke of theirs mind &#8211; hit the most vocal and send out a message. Seems to have worked too, the message being Don&#8217;t do paid reviews, don&#8217;t link to paid review services (nofollowed or not) and don&#8217;t do paid links and perhaps most importantly  don&#8217;t get caught doing so either.</p>
<p>Oh well, there&#8217;s always the confess your sins reinclusion route I guess</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

