4 ms·

Maybe I am wrong about this, and maybe the SEO junk sites would find a way to evolve, but what I really want from google is a plonk button so I can have a perso

Maybe I am wrong about this, and maybe the SEO junk sites would find a way to evolve, but what I really want from google is a plonk button so I can have a personal kill file for sites that I never want to see again.

Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
Wow, yes to this -- your own google blacklist.
- mcherm 4y ago
  As a bonus, Google would have access to the list of who had blacklisted what sites -- surely that would be useful to them as a signal to detect "SEO spam sites".
  - Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
    But if they do that, then Goodharts gonna get his law involved and SEO will then involve gaming these lists to blacklist competitors. Arg.
fnord123 4y ago
Google allowing the blacklisting of sites with lots of ads on them and using google analytics? They have enough information when yiu clock back and select a different result. And this hasnt killed SEO spam.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
  That's because Google is an ad company. They will never be part of the solution.
squarefoot 4y ago
It would be possible to do that at browser level through extensions, for example there is one to filter out Pinterest results from search results. I wouldn't however expect that potentially great feature to be natively available in Google search anytime soon, unless they made it as a analytics filled paid service and in a way that gave their advertisers and investors the power of circumventing it, that is, both plonk and unplonk as a service.
jmillikin 4y ago
Google used to support this[0], and I used it happily for blocking low-quality domains such as Experts Exchange, certain Wikia subdomains, and Pintrest. The feature was later removed[1] in favor of a browser extension, but the extension was less functional because it could only filter out results from the current page, so heavily-spammed keywords had result pages with only one or two links. Nowadays, with the results being entirely spam for multiple pages, I think a return of the server-side filtering would be necessary if it's to be at all useful. Otherwise you'll get page after page of blank SERPs. [0] https://searchengineland.com/google-brings-back-blocking-sites-in-search-results-67723 https://searchengineland.com/google-brings-back-blocking-sit... [1] https://searchengineland.com/googles-more-personalized-results-wont-let-you-block-search-results-108015 https://searchengineland.com/googles-more-personalized-resul...
supriyo-biswas 4y ago
You could use ublacklist[1], it does filtering of search results on the client side. arosh’s list is a good place to start blocking crap. [1] https://github.com/iorate/ublacklist https://github.com/iorate/ublacklist [2] https://github.com/arosh?tab=repositories https://github.com/arosh?tab=repositories
impalallama 4y ago
HN perennial hit Kagi is good for this.

Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago

Wow, yes to this -- your own google blacklist.

mcherm 4y ago
As a bonus, Google would have access to the list of who had blacklisted what sites -- surely that would be useful to them as a signal to detect "SEO spam sites".
- Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
  But if they do that, then Goodharts gonna get his law involved and SEO will then involve gaming these lists to blacklist competitors. Arg.

fnord123 4y ago

Google allowing the blacklisting of sites with lots of ads on them and using google analytics? They have enough information when yiu clock back and select a different result. And this hasnt killed SEO spam.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
That's because Google is an ad company. They will never be part of the solution.

squarefoot 4y ago

It would be possible to do that at browser level through extensions, for example there is one to filter out Pinterest results from search results. I wouldn't however expect that potentially great feature to be natively available in Google search anytime soon, unless they made it as a analytics filled paid service and in a way that gave their advertisers and investors the power of circumventing it, that is, both plonk and unplonk as a service.

jmillikin 4y ago

Google used to support this[0], and I used it happily for blocking low-quality domains such as Experts Exchange, certain Wikia subdomains, and Pintrest. The feature was later removed[1] in favor of a browser extension, but the extension was less functional because it could only filter out results from the current page, so heavily-spammed keywords had result pages with only one or two links. Nowadays, with the results being entirely spam for multiple pages, I think a return of the server-side filtering would be necessary if it's to be at all useful. Otherwise you'll get page after page of blank SERPs. [0] https://searchengineland.com/google-brings-back-blocking-sites-in-search-results-67723 https://searchengineland.com/google-brings-back-blocking-sit... [1] https://searchengineland.com/googles-more-personalized-results-wont-let-you-block-search-results-108015 https://searchengineland.com/googles-more-personalized-resul...

supriyo-biswas 4y ago

You could use ublacklist[1], it does filtering of search results on the client side. arosh’s list is a good place to start blocking crap. [1] https://github.com/iorate/ublacklist https://github.com/iorate/ublacklist [2] https://github.com/arosh?tab=repositories https://github.com/arosh?tab=repositories

impalallama 4y ago

HN perennial hit Kagi is good for this.