Co-Op should be based on another search engine

It's 2 now. No sense to be with Co-Op.

 

Spam site: t1ps2see.com

Number of listings...

Google : 2,190,000,000 (Before geting banned!)
Yahoo : 9,230 (Before geting banned!)
MSN : 110 (47 now.)

Oh yes, 2.19 Billion pages of SPAM really is better than just 9,230!!! Google stinks!!!!!

 

Loads of people are saying google is broken and that it will somehow sort itself out. Its been months now and there are no signs of any 'fix'.

The site command has gone the same way of the link command and we just have to face up to it sooner or later.

 

IMO Co-op shld be 50% Google, 25% Yahoo and 25% MSN so that even if a site gets banned or de-indexed by Google it still has something with it. Im saying this cos Google might ban or accuse a site in error. Chances of Google banning a site in error are very low hence it shld cover the major (50%) but not the entire.

 

Whether google is broken or not I would not want my links on a site it had decided to ban. Even if the site is the best site in the world if google has decided to ban it then its not a good place to get links from or link to.

 

In that case you shld not use co-op ads. Matt Cutts has clearly stated in his blog that sites using co-op are scrapped from Google. Do we trust him?

I can link to a banned site if they pay me my money..Google dosent have any rights to determine who is bad and who is not.

Also, do Co-op admins checked if a particular site advertized on Co-op is banned by Google?

 

I have pointed it out so many times but nobody cares to listen..

 

Latehorn, you said impressions is no good now you say Google is no good, so what is your solution

 

I dont know if Google is broken or not. None of us know this. I believe it is and that Big Doggie isnt all they thought it would be.

But that aside. Google has been doing this deindexing / reindexing crap for a long time and its a real PITA, especially from the coop perspective.

 

Learn to read thread-titles..

 

This doesn't mean i agree with the co-op simply being based on google.
This doesn't mean i agree with Shawns statement in it's entireity.

 

This doesn't mean I agree with... you.

btw - I think we should base the co-op off Gigablast, or perhaps a fork off the co-op and create a new sub co-op. Gigablast is a one man show and we'd have much easier time lobbying with one man (a few beers) than we would with a whole megacomplex of a company (perhaps requiring 1 Googol beers!).

Can't complain against a search engine that will give you a boost in their SERPS just for providing a one-way link back to them. Cheers Gigablast!

 

That's a non answer Shawn. :/

 

Hmm...its nothing I seriously put any research into.Was being a bit biased because like to cheer on the underdog. But I do think they have a powerful algo. I'm not the only one either, check out their clients page.

 

This may explain a little


Google is Broken - And I think I know how... Article explaining what Google's problem might be regarding the lack of relevancy, deindexing of sites and dramatic drop in search rankings of many websites. DIGG this article!

 

We could make this debate endless if we try to include every existing engine. But you have to admit, of the big three, google is broken where it used to be in line with MSN and Yahoo!. Those two are still consistent. Those are the three we would want to concentrate on.

Alternative networks for each is rediculous. An average of the 3 would be nice. But with google so far off, even that could drag the average below reality.

 

That makes very little sense, seeing as many people with new sites get their visitors primarly from yahoo and msn, the internet is bigger then google.

 

I agree and acknowledge that you can make good money from Yahoo and MSN. The fact remains that for us in the UK google has a 75% market share and I wouldn't want to do anything that might jeopodise my rankings.

 

maybe we could change the coop to go off of pages in digg or myspace =P