 sj |
||
|
||
BS Threads and Google
|
|
|
Subject: BS Threads and Google From: Peter T. Date: 01 May 04 - 10:20 AM It is worth noting that BS Threads are now appearing in Google. The "American Soldiers Torturing Iraqis" thread is the very first reference in Google (I typed in "American Soldiers Torturing"), even before CBS News (!!!!!), and a hundred other headlines from major news outlets following. I think this explains why we are getting all kinds of "outside callers". I don't know if anything should be done about it, but it is worth pointing it out. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 01 May 04 - 10:28 AM I also noticed that google has expanded it's reach into the depths of our forum with links to photos which it didn't used to have. Max's relationship with the google people helps him but I don't see it helping us any. Frankly, I'm afraid of the scrutiny. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if our forum was one that was regularly watched by the FBI, NSA, and other organizations charged with carrying out the terms of The Patriot ACT. (But then, I have been accused of treason and torturing people with my autoharp) harpy |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Rapparee Date: 01 May 04 - 10:39 AM Anyone investigating you already would have your picture, etc. long before reading your posts on the 'Cat. Besides, you haven't posted anything seditious, only critical of US policy and the President. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 01 May 04 - 10:43 AM I know Rapaire, but the line between sedition and free speech seems to have been blurred considerably by TPA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 10:45 AM I also posted this message to the aforementioned thread: PeterT, if you typed in the exact title of this thread, or the beginning of it, and it is the only title/string of words that is an exact match, then it will of course come up first in a google search. You could do this for any number of Mudcat thread titles. Perhaps you aren't clear on how the google search engine works? Also, anyone who thinks that the messages they post at Mudcat are beyond scrutiny to the public through google is mistaken. The first hit in a google search with the word 'mudcat' brings up links to the homepage and the forum. It has always been thus, and isn't just a result of Max linking to google. And PeterT, though I am a guest, I'm not a newcomer. I have posted here on and off, for years. I'm not clear on what information you are basing your perception that Mudcat is currently undergoing an invasion by godless Mongols. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Deckman Date: 01 May 04 - 10:47 AM Here we go ... McCarthyism, all over again??? I, for one, refuse to give into the paranoia of living in these times. Certainly the so called "Patriots Act" is a chilling thing. But, having lived through, and survived very well, the scary political times of the 50's, I won't go there again. We are an open society and I intend to do everything possible to keep it that way. I will continue to criticize my government whenever I feel such criticism is warrented. And I will also praise it whenever I feel like it. If the FBI wants to visit me, again, I only ask that they get the right yellow house and don't frighten the neighbors. CHEERS, Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Max Date: 01 May 04 - 11:00 AM The proliferation of valuable information and informed opinions is a good thing. Google's indexing technology is the best there is, and based on sound science which is why they are such a popular search engine. The fact that we are showing up in searches is a reflection of the quality of information we have here, not the "relationship" I have with them. Besides, I've been working with the NSA for some time now. They think that as long as you are home posting to a Web site, you are no threat to the country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 01 May 04 - 11:00 AM Godless Mongols? Wheah??? I GOTS to seeum!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 01 May 04 - 11:02 AM Well, I don't want anyone to think I don't admire Max and his prodigous abilities and many fine qualities. I just wish, rather naively I know, that we were better protected from complete scrutiny. I do agree with you, Bob about not giving in to the paranoia. I just hope that in the future, this forum won't be used against us if McAshcroftism takes hold like McCarthyism did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 01 May 04 - 11:05 AM And Max...remember what happened to Ferdinand Magellan!!!! LOL and gulp! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 11:05 AM "Besides, I've been working with the NSA for some time now. They think that as long as you are home posting to a Web site, you are no threat to the country." Yeah sure, until they get the list of books you've been reading from your local library! "If the FBI wants to visit me, again, I only ask that they get the right yellow house and don't frighten the neighbors." Been there too. The only time I was ever truly frightened as a citizen though, despite government scrutiny of my activities, didn't have anything to do with what I was doing or the federales doing when they spied upon me and my terrorist colleagues in the NEA, the peace movement, and probably our neighbor action to stop the freeway expansion going in through our neighborhood, was when I heard the US was closing the borders on 9/11. Anyone with experience of closing of borders knows why. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Peter T. Date: 01 May 04 - 11:10 AM Guest, I am more than aware of what Google does, and nowhere do I say anything about godless Mongols (being a Buddhist myself, I am probably more akin to that Buddhist people than many others here). I was pointing out that Google (as harpgirl says) references thread titles, and not just the overall site references; and putting them atop others. Maybe the priorization is a change -- it may well have been occurring for a long time, I have not been paying that much attention to Google. I thought it might be worth pointing out how powerful Google is. Personally, it will make me rethink how I title threads I start. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Deckman Date: 01 May 04 - 11:12 AM MacAshcroftism!!!!! I LOVE it. Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 11:34 AM PeterT, it isn't my fault you embarrassed yourself, so why are you directing your remarks at me? Hell, if you're a Buddhist, I'm sure you can suck it up, and handle an ego wounding now and then, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Ed. Date: 01 May 04 - 11:42 AM Google's indexing technology is...based on sound science...The fact that we are showing up in searches is a reflection of the quality of information we have here Come on Max, that's not quite right. Google's PageRank™ is certainly a great idea, but there's nothing scientific about it. The well known example of a search for Weapons of Mass Destruction and what the top match (still) is, shows how easily Google's system can be (even unconsciously) manipulated. Whilst the mudcat certainly contains a lot of quality information, it's surely the fact that it's popular that helps in Google searches, isn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 11:54 AM And I don't know that the BS section is exactly where the quality information on this website lies... And I'm a frequent enough contributing time waster to it to know that it isn't exactly high end political discourse from knowledgeable people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Peter T. Date: 01 May 04 - 11:58 AM Guest, why not type "Moron" into Google, and see how high up the list you appear? I am sure you will be somewhere in the top ten. yours, Peter T. (godless Mongol) |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: CarolC Date: 01 May 04 - 11:58 AM The top four or five hits in that search are internet fora. I find that this happens quite a lot when I do searches. Most of the time, I don't bother reading them when I'm doing a serious search for information, and I suspect that a lot of other people probably treat them the same way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Backstage Manager(inactive) Date: 01 May 04 - 12:14 PM The fact that we are showing up in searches is a reflection of the quality of information we have here I don't think the *quality* of the information is the key factor in a Google search. I just did a search that combined "rubbish" and "golf" and got 76,700 hits. Mudcat was #1. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 12:16 PM Tsk, tsk PeterT. Not very Buddha-like, now are we? |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Ed. Date: 01 May 04 - 12:19 PM golf rubbish My point exactly, Backstage Manager |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 12:41 PM Google's top 10 moron hits Now be a good sport there, PeterT. You know someone was going to answer your challenge. I know you'll be disappointed that there isn't any mention of Mudcat guests, but I'm sure you'll get over it. I must admit, I am pleased by the number one result, though. Happy reading folks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Peter T. Date: 01 May 04 - 01:02 PM Something we can agree on! yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Max Date: 01 May 04 - 01:27 PM While "Is Golf Rubbish?" may not be the most important topic to need to find, think of important song data or even timely OBIT threads. A folk/blues/trad news item happens, and here are thousands upon thousands or educated and experienced enthusiasts publishing legit data in real time. We live in this world, we know these people, and we love it. Who better? I find it rather fascinating that the people I have most respect for and find most enjoyable (Mudcatters) are showing up in the searches for non music subjects like "American Soldiers Torturing". Can't you see the power we have? Our take on the issues has priority over legitimate news organizations as far as Google is concerned. Google is the most popular search engine on the planet. I think that is hilarious. With the state of news organizations in America now, with all the sensationalism and all, I find the Mudcat a more valid source anyway. I think its perfectly appropriate social commentary. Plus I think we can have some fun with this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 01 May 04 - 01:34 PM As for the connection with Google ads and Mudcats info being on Google - Google does run searches on their ad sites (I know, because my private website uses Google ads too), but they run searches everywhere. Mudcat & other Google affiliates just have their info updated more often in the seach engine. It doesn't get special precidence (at least Google doesn't admit to that) to those sites, they're just more up to date - which is why recent Mudcat stuff will be on Google. Shameless plug (hey - it is a lyric site): Blackcatter's World of TV Theme Lyrics |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: CarolC Date: 01 May 04 - 01:36 PM With the state of news organizations in America now, with all the sensationalism and all, I find the Mudcat a more valid source anyway. I think its perfectly appropriate social commentary. I agree with you there, Max. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: catspaw49 Date: 01 May 04 - 01:50 PM I agree Max....The joint is a treasure-trove of folklore. "Cleigh O'Possum" gets 10 hits!! And if you enter, Max, Spaw, kick in the balls, you get this result. Far out huh? This is really important stuff and needs to be out there for the ages!! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Franz S. Date: 01 May 04 - 01:52 PM Hey, we haven't had any privacy for at least 20 years. Any major marketer worth its salt knows more about me than I do, and I get all warm anf cuddly thinking about how much my government cares about me and my actions. Or comments. We can't keep them from finding out whatever they want to find out, though it's more than appropriate to throw whatever little roadblocks we can in their way. But we need to do some serious thinking about the protocols, etiquette, and basic philosophy of living in a world without privacy. "If you have nothing to hide, don't worry" is not sufficient. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 01 May 04 - 01:55 PM Ferdinand had power too, Max... |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Max Date: 01 May 04 - 01:58 PM Harpy, I am ready for that fight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 May 04 - 01:58 PM I just tried putting the heading of this thread up in Google, with with and without quote marks, and it didn't show up. Then I tried with one thta's been around a bit longer, "BS: Are the Celts Rubbish ", and that didn't show up either. So the googlification hasn't extended to cover everything here yet. My own concern wouldn't be about surveillance - I always assume everything is under surveillance anyway. But what I value about the Mudcat, and what gives discussions a kind of ballast, is that we have come here primarily because of the music, and beneath our disagreements about various things, there is that common basis of agreement (even where we might disagree about the music as well, we agree think it matters). If we lose that, we lose a great deal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: katlaughing Date: 01 May 04 - 02:01 PM LOL...good one, PeterT, you godless Mongrel, you!**bg** Max, I agree, mostly.:-) kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 01 May 04 - 02:08 PM Amazing. A serarch for Popular Views of the Bush produces four pages of results and ALL of them are from Mudcat. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Peter T. Date: 01 May 04 - 02:09 PM I hadn't thought about infecting the Google with Mudcatiana! Max, you remain a man after my own heart. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Ed. Date: 01 May 04 - 02:20 PM Can't you see the power we have? I trust that you're joking? Our take on the issues has priority over legitimate news organizations as far as Google is concerned which certainly suggests the Google's 'sound science' is a little unsound. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 01 May 04 - 02:22 PM Max, Ferdinand drew and quartered the mutineers, but when they got the Phillipines, he ended up being snail food on some Phillipino beach! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 01 May 04 - 02:28 PM One thing to remember is that many people already have chosen their discussion boards that they're addicted to. While we can do searches like the ones list above - how many people other than 'Catters are? I mean - who in the hell is going to search for golf & rubbish? Ye Gods! It's still the music discussions that will be the primary route to find Mudcat. And considering that the number of BS threads has not risen significantly since Mudcat started separating them out of the main, I'd say that more Google conenctions aren't meaning all that much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 02:34 PM Ed, apparently you haven't been around here for long. He is serious, and he does have that inflated of a sense of self-importance, which is shared by his boot licking minions. That said, he'll get pissed now, and likely block my IP for a few weeks to punish me for saying again that the emperor has no clothes. McGrath, I suggest you learn more about the google search engine, as you seem baffled as to why your thread titles don't work the way 'American Soldiers Torturing' works. On second thought, maybe you should just leave well enough alone, and let the man behind the curtain tell you everything you need to know like the Mudcat core devotees do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: wilbyhillbilly Date: 01 May 04 - 02:40 PM What I would like to know is, WHAT HAS THIS THREAD GOT TO DO WITH MUSIC? Should it not be under BS, or am I getting (even more) totally confused, Hmm, it must be the age thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Ed. Date: 01 May 04 - 02:43 PM GUEST 02:34 PM, I've been around here for several years. That's the only thing that you got wrong. My IP address was blocked once, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 01 May 04 - 02:45 PM I suggest, Guest, that your jealousy is showing its ugly face again -- either that, or you are an unrequited and passionate admirer of Max; being spurned can be very painful, I am sure. Many of us share your pain... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 May 04 - 02:52 PM "...the man behind the curtain " - a fair description of a nameless GUEST. No I wouldn't take much account of anything from one of those. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 02:53 PM A fellow traveller, eh Ed? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Ed. Date: 01 May 04 - 02:56 PM Just a normal person, I think |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 01 May 04 - 02:59 PM "Fellow traveller": Meaning Someone sympathetic toward a certain point of view without being a fully paid-up member of the club. Origin First applied to people who inclined toward the views of the Communist Party. Coined by Leon Trotsky. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 01 May 04 - 03:01 PM wilbyhillbilly : Sure, it is not music. But sometimes threads about Mudcat itself are left above the salt since they are germane to the folk-forum process. I suppose it is a judgment call, is all. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Ed. Date: 01 May 04 - 03:05 PM Not really sure what you mean. I do think that Max has a tendency to be full of himself, but that's all |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: wilbyhillbilly Date: 01 May 04 - 03:06 PM Thanks Amos, something else I have learned, just glad its NOT my age thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: wilbyhillbilly Date: 01 May 04 - 03:10 PM Now I AM totally confused, cos its now under BS. I give up, in future I'll just keep my mouth shut and mind my own business. I will now go in a corner and sulk |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 May 04 - 04:28 PM Max has a tendency to be full of himself Being "full of yourself" as a knocking comment is an odd one, when you think of it. After all, generally speaking, whatever is inside anyone's skin is "themself" (leaving aside pregnancy and indigestion). |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Max Date: 01 May 04 - 10:50 PM If it seems like I pursue my self-interest here, then everything is just fine. I do pursue my self-interest here. This is my Web site. It runs on a few computers that I have in my basement. I run it because it is in my self-interest. It makes me happy. It provides me with a sense of pride and incredible access to damn-near-unlimited information about the things I find most interesting in this world. And it provides me easy access to the people who I have the most in common with, the people that I most enjoy sharing stories and opinions and small talk with. Things are important when you make them important. Things are meaningful when you give them meaning. We are people and this is what we do. This is what makes us different from squirrels. The fact that we have more than the nut. You're damn right I think the Mudcat is important. You're damn right I think I'm important. If I don't... who will? If I didn't run the Mudcat, who would? |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Deckman Date: 02 May 04 - 01:04 AM MAX ... Well said and keep it up! Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: DonMeixner Date: 02 May 04 - 01:10 AM Harpgirl, I would think you are right about being watched. That said I hope John Ashcroft, the most dangerous man on the planet, is fired by whom ever is the next president. Max. I am thrilled that this is your hobby and you let play in your yard. If I ever get to where I am not playing fairly, just send me home. Don |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 02 May 04 - 01:22 AM Amen Max. Keep on, keepin on - you know we've got your back if you ever need it (or want it.) And All ye who slam the Mudcat or Max: Y'all are just funny. At least the oddballs who don't just leave. It's like going back repeatedly to a store you don't like to try and persuade all the happy customers how horrible to place is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Peter T. Date: 02 May 04 - 11:38 AM In spite of what he says, Max underestimates the value of Mudcat to many people, and how much depends on his indefatigability. He has a lot to be proud about. If that is sucking up, schlloooooooop (feeble attempt at a sucking sound). yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 02 May 04 - 12:36 PM Bravo, bravissimo. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 02 May 04 - 12:46 PM "Not really sure what you mean. I do think that Max has a tendency to be full of himself, but that's all" Ed, look to the definition/meaning portion of my post that says "without being a fully paid-up member of the club." We are obviously sympathetic towards the Mudcat because we both participate here. But thinking that Max has a tendency to be full of himself means we aren't fully paid-up members of his boot licking minions. I hope I've been able to explain that well enough. It is the second time I have used the "fellow travellers" phrase in a week, where it seemingly went right over the head of the person I used it with. Perhaps there aren't enough people well versed in the language of the CP anymore, for people to get the joke. Apologies for being overly...I'm not exactly sure what...obscure in my references? |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Nigel Parsons Date: 02 May 04 - 01:27 PM I only find one thing anoying about 'Google' indexing Mudcat threads. That is when a query is posted in the non/BS section & I try to help by A) using a Mudcat Super search, and B)(if A fails) searching google. This often loops me back to the 'Cat. It is not just the BS which is being listed Nigel |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 02 May 04 - 01:27 PM Not just in your references, pussycat, but in your real meaning, and even mores o in your real intent. On the surface of it, it looks destructive. Whaddya think of that? Ya got some deep desire to do harm floating around in yore haid? I tink maybe?? Ya?? Revenge? Or just generalized sociopathy? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Bill D Date: 02 May 04 - 05:53 PM "... But thinking that Max has a tendency to be full of himself means we aren't fully paid-up members of his boot licking minions." umm..golly- I have had numerous opportunities to lick Max's boots in person, and neither of us thought of it. I don't even know what he charges for the privilege! We shared a couple of beers freely, and I took some pics of his new daughter, but boot-licking never came up. Max played some blues in a workshop, but I don't think he even WORE boots) lemme see.....yep...just old sneakers silly? Sure...but so is your remark. Max has friends and admirers and helpers and more....but I think he'd laugh out loud at the idea of bootlickers.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 02 May 04 - 05:57 PM Yawn. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 May 04 - 08:07 PM Same pillock, or a different one this time? |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST Date: 02 May 04 - 08:11 PM Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Bill D Date: 02 May 04 - 11:08 PM shhhhh! it's asleep....don't wake it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 03 May 04 - 12:04 AM Using the term "it" is far too high a compliment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 03 May 04 - 05:07 PM I don't understand how Google decides how deep into a website to stick its tendrils, but I do know that if you enter "Catspaw49" into Google you get, as of this date, 432 hits, all of which seem to be Mudcat related. Spaw has posted to the 'Cat almost 20,000 times so Google's only picked up a small percentage of actual posts so far. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 03 May 04 - 07:26 PM I don't really understand it either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Doug Chadwick Date: 03 May 04 - 07:46 PM If you put CATSPAW49 into Mudcat's Lyrics & Knowledge Search then you come up with just over 400 hits. These only refer to posts that contain the actual target word within the body of the text rather than as the poster's name. Google must be doing the same thing. If you click on the name CATSPAW49 at the start of one of his posts then you will get nearly 20,000 hits Doug C |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: CarolC Date: 03 May 04 - 09:01 PM This is interesting. I googled the following search parameters: bs carolc I got 341 hits on that search (Click) But in the second hit, there is a link to click that says, "[ More results from www.mudcat.org ]", and when I clicked on that one, I got 168 more hits. The first search produced a lot of hits that weren't Mudcat related as well as those that were. Surprisingly, some of the hits had loki as the server, and they worked. Loki's back! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: CarolC Date: 03 May 04 - 09:04 PM Ha! Joke's on me. I just clicked on the loki link and it was www.mudcat. I guess the servers are arranged in that round-robin configuration or something. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 03 May 04 - 09:46 PM I did this a while back - when doing a search for "Blackcatter" you get posts here, the pages on my site (Blackcatter's World of TV Theme Lyrics) and links to my church's website (my email uses Blackcatter) along with a few incidental posts on other forums, etc. There's only a couple hundred of my posts here listed, but rarely do I sign my posts. I'll look again - maybe they're posts where other posters refer to me. Hmmm |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 03 May 04 - 09:58 PM Googling "blackcatter" "mudcat" shows two things - of the 217 or so hits, none are older that Oct. 2003 (and I've been posting here as Blackcatter since 2000) and that there are plenty of threads where the only Blackcatter in it is my "from" handle - no one refering to me, nor me signing my name. So it definately is picking up our names both in the list at the top of the page as well as in every post. Those threads that have effectively been "dead" for over 6 months seem to have been thown out of the mix. Interesting. I wonder how that's done (if my hypothesis is correct). |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Burke Date: 04 May 04 - 07:00 PM CarolC, Google gives the overall counts, but does not display all the hits at first. I just clicked your link, it says: Results 1 - 10 of about 333 for bs carolc. At the bottom of the page, it shows 4 pages worth of hits. Less than 40 of the 333 are shown immediately, the rest are hidden under the [more] click. On the last page they give you link to redo the search showing all the results. Then you can see them all. What I don't know is why I got 8 hits less than you did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 04 May 04 - 07:30 PM Was amused by the 'Moron Air Base' Link http://www.moron.af.mil/home.htm :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Doug Chadwick Date: 05 May 04 - 02:51 AM Here's an interesting aside. (well, it's interesting to me, anyway) If I put "Chadwick" into the Mudcat Lyrics and Knowledge Search box and tick the Forum, I get a list of posts where references have been made to myself or another of the same name. While looking up some back discussion on Joe Clones, I put "Joe" into the box and came up with nothing. That surprised me, so I tried "Offer" – again nothing. "Max" gave the same thing although "Spiegel" did give a positive result. It seems amazing that, in all the discussion there has been on Mudcat over the years, nobody has ever made any references to Max or Joe Offer. Doug C
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: JohnInKansas Date: 05 May 04 - 01:35 PM One of the main "critera" that Google uses to compile its search pages is the number of links to a site. Google generally does most of it's "crawling" in .com sites, with relatively low penetration in .org sites like mudcat. You get a 'cat thread in a search result mostly when someone has put a link to it in "the outside .com world." When a "hit" is recorded, it's usually the "subject" shown in the link that seems to govern the "key words" that are associated to the link. Having the Google ads here may have encouraged them to actually "crawl" the cat, but the incidence of results doesn't really suggest that they've done so. Perhaps one reason that BS threads are showing up more in Google is because the people who start them go "brag" by putting a link elsewhere. There have been several examples of "Google spoofing" that show that creating enough links to your site (sometimes just links between a few "cooperating" sites) can pop your site to the top of Google searches. It's a parlour sport, and apparently the number of links needed isn't all that large. If the 'cat is showing in Google because people are posting links to what's here, it does sort of support the idea that something interesting is happening here. That's fine, as long as we're not "interesting" to the wrong kinds of people. (I'm thinking the flamers and spammers, but you're welcome to think FBI and CIA if you like.) John |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Burke Date: 05 May 04 - 06:42 PM John, I've seen very recent Mudcat messages in Google so I don't think that linking is what makes the difference. Mudcat seems to be scanned pretty regularly. I suspect frequency of search term usage at a site or on a page has something to do with it. If you search "News from Guam" the Mudcat thread comes up first. Click on "More results from mudcat..." you'll find 24 hits. 17 are on the thread & 7 are the forum page. See the last message in the cache for when it was indexed. If Google counts the frequency of a seach term on a page & the subject is repeated for every message, our long discussions would test out as highly relevant. That may also account for other very long BS threads coming up high in search results. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: JohnInKansas Date: 05 May 04 - 07:16 PM As I said, it is possible that "we're being scanned." One of the initial difficulties with the little Google ads was that the "context sensitive placement" wasn't too good. They can't place ads that relate to content until they do the scan to determine what the content is, so it is possible that we're getting more visibility that way. Actually, being more visible to advertisers may be a lot more scary than being watched by the CIA or NSA - at least if your politics are as boring as mine. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 05 May 04 - 09:21 PM it's the "backscratching principle" folks! But it's a Maxocracy!!! I want to see Max make a bundle during the IPO! Go Max!!! College tuition awaits!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 05 May 04 - 09:25 PM Google does scan the webpages that have Google ads - Like John said, that's how they know how to match content. They then add that to the Google search engine results. They also scan pretty soon after a page is created. For example, Google isn't likely to scan a page for up to 2 weeks normally, but there is a thread about Millard Filmore that was created yesterday or the day before. It already has presidential-oriented ads. I do think that Google does hit non .com pages pretty well. The content on my church's website (.org) is kept pretty up to date. My personal site (.net) was also prior to my using Google Ads. (afterwards, pages seem to be scanned with a day or so). As for advertisers knowing what we're doing, I doubt that Google tells its advertisers which pages their ads are on, just the approximate number of pages, and traffic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: harpgirl Date: 05 May 04 - 09:38 PM Actually, what I've been imagining is that Max has become good buds with the Google guys cuz they're all cut from the same cloth and he's gonna get rich because they think he's cool like they are! Go Max |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: CarolC Date: 05 May 04 - 11:53 PM Wow. This keeps getting even more interesting. I thought I'd check out the bit about people linking to the Mudcat on other sites. I looked in the Google search on 'bs carolc' that I linked to above, and I found a link to this site: www.androidtechnologies.com. I scrolled down a bit (about halfway down the page),and I found a link to this thread in the Mudcat: BS: Graduation gift Also interesting, when I just now checked that Google search, this thread was the first hit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 06 May 04 - 12:13 AM Want to know which pages have linked to Mudcat - simple. Go here: Google Link Search It's easy to do: Just put link:www.mugcat.org in the Google search box. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Burke Date: 06 May 04 - 10:10 AM Is there a truncation symbol for Google? I tried * and ! but neither worked. I thought Google searches were automatically trucated. The link search seems to be an exact match. Blackcatters search yielded 380 hits. This search link:www.mudcat.org/threads.cfm gives 505. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: GUEST,Shlio Date: 06 May 04 - 05:39 PM I found Mudcat on Google - the Mother of all BS Threads comes up on quite a few searches. What an experience for the unwary! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Blackcatter Date: 21 May 04 - 07:05 PM Hello - I'm reviving this thread because I didcoverd something and need independent confirmation. I use Netscape at my primary browser and but I was checking my website with I.E. (both at work with the latest version and at home with 5.5) On the older version the Google ads on my pages (and at Mudcat) do not show up. On the newer version they are nissing the blue clicky titles. I have no problem seeing the ads either here or on my website in Netscape (and I checked 3 version of it). I've sent a message to Google Ads, but who knows when I'll get a response. Can those of you using I.E. see the ads at the bottom of each page here at Mudcat? Thanks! |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: JennyO Date: 22 May 04 - 02:41 AM I have IE, and I can see them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: Amos Date: 22 May 04 - 02:44 AM Safari under OS X displays them correctly. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS Threads and Google From: JennyO Date: 22 May 04 - 02:48 AM Sorry, forgot to mention that mine is Version 6. |
| Translate Thread |
