3 ms·
I wouldn't argue that just because current algos aren't throwing flags, the sites must be fine. We read TechCrunch and HN, hear the complaints, and see searches
by Matt_Cutts 16y ago
I wouldn't argue that just because current algos aren't throwing flags, the sites must be fine. We read TechCrunch and HN, hear the complaints, and see searches that we want to be better.
The challenge (in my mind, at least) is how to improve the algorithms more and when it's appropriate to say "This is low enough quality that it's actually spam, and thus we're willing to look at manual action." On the bright side, we've actually got a potential algorithm idea that we're exploring now.
- ddemchuk 16y agoI think identifying low quality content is important, yes. But the topic I've brought up is dealing with somewhat decent quality content (all of the guides do explain how to tie shoelaces) that are individually targeting subtle longtail keyword variations. It's keyword variation content spam using hand written content and curated by very specific keyword data. So that seems to be a different algo trigger than a quality trigger.