5 ms·

So... this is pretty much saying they will now analyze all links now, irregardless of "nofollow". Previously they outright ignored "nofollow".

xg15 7y ago
Seems so. They note at the end that they still respect rel=noindex and of course robots.txt though.
yyyk 7y ago
Nitpick: There's no such word as "irregardless". Escorts myself out
- illnewsthat 7y ago
  Nitpick: there is such a word according to MW [1] [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
  - yyyk 7y ago
    1. I only recognise the Oxford English Dictionary, not those upstart Americans ;-) 2. Even the Americans say (from your link): "Irregardless was popularized in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its increasingly widespread spoken use called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead." That's doesn't read as accepting the 'word' beyond the most technical noting that some people use it.
    - Jach 7y ago
      Dictionaries are historians of usage not legislators of language. At least in English, where we have no equivalent to the "Académie française" (suck it, Jonathan Swift).
    - howderek 7y ago
      Though it considers it "non-standard" the word also exists in the Oxford English Dictionary: https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/99668 https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/99668
- apocalypstyx 7y ago
  Slightly tangential, but this comes to mind: We are not here concerned with so-called computer 'languages', which resemble human languages (English, Sanskrit, Malayalam, Mandarin Chinese, Twi or Shoshone etc.) in some ways but are forever totally unlike human languages in that they do not grow out of the unconscious but directly out of consciousness. Computer language rules ('grammar') are stated first and thereafter used. The 'rules' of grammar in natural human languages are used first and can be abstracted from usage and stated explicitly in words only with difficulty and never completely. --Walter Ong [Orality And Literacy]
- amelius 7y ago
  For every word in existence, there was someone who used it first.
  - wahern 7y ago
    I don't think it's that simple. There's a chicken & egg paradox at play.
- decasteve 7y ago
  Are you trying to start an inflame war?
Kimm0n0 7y ago
Not enough signals when everything is tagged "nofollow"
zonidjan 7y ago
It actually sounds like they've already been analyzing all links, regardless of "nofollow". Which is not surprising in any way.

xg15 7y ago

Seems so. They note at the end that they still respect rel=noindex and of course robots.txt though.

yyyk 7y ago

Nitpick: There's no such word as "irregardless". Escorts myself out

illnewsthat 7y ago
Nitpick: there is such a word according to MW [1] [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
- yyyk 7y ago
  1. I only recognise the Oxford English Dictionary, not those upstart Americans ;-) 2. Even the Americans say (from your link): "Irregardless was popularized in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its increasingly widespread spoken use called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead." That's doesn't read as accepting the 'word' beyond the most technical noting that some people use it.
  - Jach 7y ago
    Dictionaries are historians of usage not legislators of language. At least in English, where we have no equivalent to the "Académie française" (suck it, Jonathan Swift).
  - howderek 7y ago
    Though it considers it "non-standard" the word also exists in the Oxford English Dictionary: https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/99668 https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/99668
apocalypstyx 7y ago
Slightly tangential, but this comes to mind: We are not here concerned with so-called computer 'languages', which resemble human languages (English, Sanskrit, Malayalam, Mandarin Chinese, Twi or Shoshone etc.) in some ways but are forever totally unlike human languages in that they do not grow out of the unconscious but directly out of consciousness. Computer language rules ('grammar') are stated first and thereafter used. The 'rules' of grammar in natural human languages are used first and can be abstracted from usage and stated explicitly in words only with difficulty and never completely. --Walter Ong [Orality And Literacy]
amelius 7y ago
For every word in existence, there was someone who used it first.
- wahern 7y ago
  I don't think it's that simple. There's a chicken & egg paradox at play.
decasteve 7y ago
Are you trying to start an inflame war?

Kimm0n0 7y ago

Not enough signals when everything is tagged "nofollow"

zonidjan 7y ago

It actually sounds like they've already been analyzing all links, regardless of "nofollow". Which is not surprising in any way.