3 ms·

You are listing a bunch of methods that might be useful indicators of "good content", useful for search engine algorithms. But those are merely (possible) sympt

You are listing a bunch of methods that might be useful indicators of "good content", useful for search engine algorithms. But those are merely (possible) symptoms. "Good" is a quality of the content itself, made up of factors such as relevancy, accuracy, completeness, readability etc. Nobody said it was necessarily easy to judge these things, especially at scale. But that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

awb 5y ago
> "Good" is a quality of the content itself, made up of factors such as relevancy, accuracy, completeness, readability etc. It’s impossible to quantify a rating based on these subjective qualities you listed. I think the point is you can’t remove the human element from ranking search results without leaving the search engine open to exploitation.