Massive Pagerank with bullshit links?

Maybe Matt Cutts can explain it better:

And finally, the best part

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/more-info-on-pagerank/


Michael you're absolutely right, I should have quoted that damn article in the beginning. My mistake was trying to re-invent the wheel and explain to people why they shouldn't use the Toolbar PR as an indicator of performance. We can argue forever on whether or not it is, but let's just let Matt Cutts have the last word shall we.

 

I know exactly what you were referring to. You were also talking about the predictor tools being useless. I followed the conversation. [/quote]

Nope, there is not.

Nope, a couple of weeks old. The PR just exported. He was in fact refering to a mix of the predictor tool, which yes, is worthless, and what he saw on multi-dc checkers, which is not.

I never assumed you were talking about something else.

Yes, I do. However, I take exception with you equating "worthless" with "maybe not worth exactly what you would think it was if you didn't understand what you were looking at". They're just not the same.

As a side note, you should really stop triple posting... it's what the Edit button is for. If you hadn't noticed, the very sweet mod Summer has already consolidated a bunch of your earlier posts. You shouldn't make her work that hard, she does enough.</endasskissing>

-Michael

 

You mention that there isn't a consensus on how often PR is updated...please explain.

This was posted by you earlier:

If you already admitted that your assumption was incorrect about him using a tool to check across multiple DC's, why then do you bring it up again here:

I don't think you are following as closely as you may think you are. hy don't you jus

Yes it did just export and therefore it hasn't completely propagated across all DC's. Therefore, if you already admitted to making an assumption about him using a tool to check across DC's, how are you so sure that he is in fact seeing the correct PR in his toolbar?

Now when I use the term worthless, I am referring to its literal meaning.

i think that if you spent less time trying to be cute and paid more attention to your own posts...you wouldn't be contradicting yourself.

 

So here is the moral of the story (thanks to Matt Cutts who indirectly contributed):

1. Internal PageRank computations have many more degrees of resolution than the 0-10 values shown in the toolbar.

2. PageRank is computed continuously

3. By the time you see newer PageRanks in the toolbar, those values have already been incorporated in how we score/rank our search results.

4. You won’t see any search engine result page (SERP) changes as a result of this PageRank export–those changes have been gradually baking in since the last PageRank export.

I'm off to watch Fracture...hope it's a good one. And Michael, I suggest that you spend a little more time understanding the basics behind PR (from Google's perspective, and not your own) and less time kissing up to the mod Summer (who's doing a fantastic job).

Have a wonderful evening

 

The fact that a toolbar would be updated every 3 months does not make the toolbar worthless. Actually, the toolbar PR would be the minimum PR of the site. So, even if you diminish what you see on the toolbar to the site's minimum PR, it still has a use. Knowing the minimum site's PR is very useful. You know AT LEAST what you are up against / around what kind of PR you would get out of a backlink from it.

By the way, I also did use another tool besides the toolbar to measure the PR. I did one of those tools that checks Google's data centers. I mentioned that too, but feel free to ignore that as well, while you make up your next claim about what I said.


frosty

 

Read what I wrote above and visit the link to Matt Cutt's blog. I hate to use the same quote but you obviously don; enjoy reading:

 

He enters with a snide remarks and leaves with one too. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

@ Micahel: In any case, he didn't completely waste the forum's time. Have a look at that dating site SERP he mentioned. I thought that was interested as a site with a higher PR did get ranked below one with a lower PR. Both sites did have the same title.

@ rzvagelsky: PS I think I'll leave negative rep, since you're so snide. Enjoy your show.


frosty

 

And you don't enjoy understanding what you quote. Actually, you misunderstand what Matt is talking about. The toolbar is a reflection of Page Rank. That doesn't make it useless. It's not possible to get through to the ignorant though. I gave up on you a while ago.


frosty

 

I didn't leave yet buddy.

Which are you referring to? I am still baffled as to why you continue to look at the PR when you yourself have already mentioned that there are other factors involved. Didn't you also just say that there are other factors involved?

 

A reflection is not an accurate measure. Wasn't that the whole point of this thread (at least to the point we're at now)...trying to explain why you shouldn't use PR to measure the performance of a site?

Who's not reading carefully. It says it explicitly in the quote that the toolbar does not reflect changes in SERPS and that changes take place from the previous export. Why someone would continue to use the Toolbar PR as an indicator is beyond me

 

The past 11 PR updates:
2005-01-01
2005-04-22
2005-06-14
2005-10-19
2006-02-18
2006-04-04
2006-06-13
2006-09-29
2007-01-10
2007-01-14
2007-04-28

It has nothing to do with consensus, that's when they were, and they were not every 3 months.

No, again, you don't understand what was said. My assumption about him getting the fractional values from a multi-dc check was incorrect. He did state as well that he used a multi-dc tool.

All four statements are correct. Not one of them says anything close to your assertion of "PageRank is useless", so why you would use them in an argument trying to prove your point eludes me.

An inaccurate measure is still a measure.

You've got to be kidding.

-Michael

 

You are naturally baffled. That is because this thread is just a pissing match for your childish rants. Actually, if you were not so concerned with trying to make snide remarks, you would see that the OP is actually a question. You took a position on the question, got arrogant about it, realized you were wrong, and tried to weasel your way out of it by making up somethings that I never said.


frosty

 

OK, don't use it. I don't recall giving a crap what you do.


frosty

 

P.S. As for the Matt Cutts quote, that specifically refers to Toolbar exports. The thread is not about toolbar exports, so you missed that too. The thread is about PAGE RANK, low vs high quality link and SERP. If you were not so concerned with trying to win a pissing match, I wouldn't need to explain this to you on page 3 of this thread.

 

So I'll start off with your post Michael.

I used 3 months as a basic example of why Toolbar PR shouldn't be used as an indicator because that's a pretty good amount of time. But you wanted to be a smartass by introducing numbers...so i'll play your game. If we assume 30 days per month, the average length of time between the 11 update you posted above is 87 days (+/- 1)...which equates to just under 3 months. You're like the attorney that introduces evidence which ends up ruining his/her entire case. Would you rather I word it like this: "On average, PR updates every 3 months".

1. You agree that the real PR has more to it than what is shown on the PR Toolbar.

2. You argree that PR is computed continuously...much more often than the average of 87 days (+/- 1) over the past 11 updates.

3. You agree that by the time you see a PR export, all values that would affect SERP's would have already been computed. if you agree on this...then you would also agree that this would be the most recent and up to date value of PR, since the date of export is the closest date to the snapshot.

4. You agree that even when the PR export happens, there is no correlation between SERP's and the change of the Toolbar PR (the delta).


These were all terms that you clearly agreed to. Now if you agree to all of the above, then how is using the toolbar PR useful? That's what we're arguing about right?

I never said that it wasn't a measure...but is an inaccurate measure a useful measure? In other words, how can it advantageous or helpful to someone looking to compare their position in the SERP's to their competition. Ok so he checks across multiple DC's...now he see's the same PR 50 times. He also uses the Prediction Tool... I have already why it's a useless tool in post #20 and you already agreed to it being useless. Am I missing any other tools used?

As it goes right now...you have yet to prove how PR can be used to measure performance in any way that is useful.


Now to you frosty...

Speaking of childish rants and snide remarks...

What was that? If you disagree...please post a quote where I made something up and claimed that you said it. So far, you're the only one making things up...dishing out the insults and then saying that i'm being childish and snide. And after you tell me to go "wanking off at your porn site", you give me red rep.

And lastly,

So if the SERP's don't change when the export happens (the point when current PR is most accurate since it just happened)...what makes you think that it will be any more accurate a week, 2 weeks, or a month later when you are comparing the PR of two sites?

Do you remember the first post I made?

So I ask you...where did I make a mistake? We have clearly established from the post by Matt Cutts that by the time your Toolbar PR updates, SERP's would have already changed a while back. Maybe I should have said "Toolbar PR has no correlation with SERP's" instead...would that have made it better? I don't see how you could have taken it any other way though...its not like any of us have access to real-time PR info.

BTW...the movie wasn't that good. The ending could have happened a little different.

 

i think google will consider both the quality and quantity. anyway it still all up to google hot to give away PR. those tools just use their own algo not google's also so dont trust them much. Let PR Be!

 

Yes, that and making dishonest remarks is your repertoire.

Well yes, I gave you red rep because you are unable to carry out a civil conversation. You want to turn this into a fight, and when you lose, instead of bowing out gracefully you start making things up about me (instead of admitting your own mistake). You insinuate that I think other factors are unimportant in Google's algorithm, when I never said that. You indicate that I was only using the toolbar, which I didn't. I also used other tools that checked on Google's data centers.

Feel free to keep lying though my son.

You're oversimplifying again. If you are getting out of the sandbox then the export matters, if not then, the point probably does not apply. Also, your question implies a contradiction but you have shown no contradiction between accuracy of the toolbar PR and the lack of a drastic effect on the day of a toolbar export. Your arguments are consistently strawmen.

Vaguely. It was snide and probably made up of some logical fallacies.

You miss the point. The thread is about whether or not PR is important in SERPs, not how up-to-date the toolbar is. You continue to be fixated on the toolbar, missing the bigger issue. You are having a pissing match, I am trying to actually understand something about Google here, that's the difference between us.


frosty

 

Let me start by saying that you appear to have trouble following who is saying what. You are arguing with 2 people here. They are 2 completely different arguments. I'm just pointing out your errors, in an attempt to help you see that your attitude of rude arrogance is completely undeserved. You're not trying to help someone learn, you are merely trying to prove that you are smarter than someone with less experience than you.

No, you didn't. What you did is state this:

That is a myth. You stated the myth exactly as it has been stated time and time again. It's the same one that starts all of the "an update is due" rumors. When the range of an update is from a few weeks to 4 months you can not equate that to "every 3 months". Hell, in 2004 the PR was updated 8 times. That gives you 19 updates in 40 months. Still gonna lie and say you were going on averages? Or would you care to come clean and admit you were just repeating what you thought to be true based on what you heard?

Sort of. I was arguing more to the fact that just because you can't see a use for it does not equate to it being useless. But in essence yes, I am also stating that it is useful. What I am not stating, and what you seem to be confused about, is that it is a useful metric for measuring where you should stand in the serps for a given phrase. I never said that it was. Which means that in this statement:

You're making assumptions about what I am saying that just aren't true. I said it wasn't useless, and I said it in response to your blanket statements:

Those statements are all just wrong.

-Michael

 

Too bad. This thread started out with an interesting question and developed into a really meaningless argument.
Actually I am very interested to get an answer for this:
Is it possible to rank well with only BS links as mentioned by the OP.
Maybe we can get back to the argument (replacing PR with Rank) and discuss like normal people again without throwing insults?

 

It is possible to rank with BS links but only when there is little competition for a specific keyword. Another issue with these BS links is that many of them won't be around as long (on a page that will eventually lose most or all of its Rank) so you'll have difficulty sustaining the results for a long period of time. This is assuming of course that nobody else competes for those terms.