-
Top Commenters
-
Community
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- I agree, Daniel. I think Nick's model makes a lot of sense, and for the most part it seems to be paying off -- and not just for him, but for lots of his bloggers as well.
- "If you're a blogger at an established site like Gawker, it's quite obvious that for every dollar you make in bonus pay, Denton has made much more in terms of extra advertising revenue. You really earned ...
- I stupidly didn't even check to see if you had written anything on it, Felix -- I should have known that you would have. And an excellent analysis of the situation it is. As you note, some of the ...
- Hi Matthew -- I take it you've seen my latest <a href="http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/market-movers/2008/07/03/blogonomics-gawkers-latest-pay-cut">2,500 words on the subject</a>, so I won't reprise ...
- "Thank you Matt for this important reminder. I sure hope I don't confuse these two bastions of journalistic integrity ever again." +1 to the Duck
Is Google crowdsourcing? Not quite
excerpt
As described by Phil Lenssen at Google Blogoscoped and at Google Operating System — and apparently first spotted by Haochi at Googlified — Google is experimenting with a customized search function that allows users to “vote” search results up or down%2
...
2 comments
-
aidanhenry 7 months ago with 1 point
By adding any kind of 'opinion' to search kills its ability to remain subjective. Furthermore, it increases the likelihood of gaming by the scum of the Internet. I highly doubt (maybe 0% chance or so) that Google would ever choose this route.
The only thing I can see working is a situation where you can "vote" your OWN results up and down, so that Google can adapt to your behavioural patterns and results should become more relevant. Of course, this would have no effect on the searches of others though.
Cheers,
Aidan
www.MappingTheWeb.com -
I agree, Aidan. That's kind of what I had in mind as well. I just
don't see Google mucking with the main index, for the reasons you
describe.


