Google's 2007-Q3/Q4 PageRank (PR) Update

I still can't understand why only a few sites got their PR updated.
That's really weird. Any explanation?

 

Then you think wrong.

 

Minstrel,

Reading your response again, you're actually agreeing with what i say.

You say ranking is relative not absolute? Correct?

If google has a maximum total PR for every website in its index, then this would mean googles rank IS absolute, an absolute figure, but you are saying what i believe, that googles rank is relative... Relative means that pagerank is limitless!

 

Having ranking is good but if not showing, not too much problem either. My concern will be having a good flow of targetted traffic and increase sales.

Is google updating PR soon? Just curious.

 

Yes sir.. but for how many pages?
The algorithm doesn't support limitless pages.. the algorithm has a limit...

Under the limitation the pagerank in unlimited, but once they hit and cross the limit, it becomes limited!!!!!

 

No it's not. Relative does not mean limited, not sure why you would think it does.

-Michael

 

No. I am definitely NOT agreeing with you.

I give up. You are obviously clueless.

 

Why don't you explain yourself instead of saying everyone is wrong?

You don't help at all.

As I said before, you contrascend knowing nothing about who your talking too... and not just to me.

Pagerank could be relative... but relative to what? The number of sites in an index? If so, then it shouldn't be limited. Can't you see where I am going with this?

 

Actually, the way it's described in the original documents, the raw PR value would be a floating point figure so that the total for all pages indexed would be 1 (so there's a limit). However, that does not imply that the same would have to be true for the exported and visible figure. A simple multiplication with the number of pages converts the floating point figures so that they are no longer limited in the same sense. After that, just some more transformations, and you have a 0-10 scale without the "limitations" you speak of.

The fact is, we have no way to verify how it really works. I guess we don't have many reasons to, either, but that's another argument.

 

frisk, don't reply, seriously. He will pretend not to understand, because he has some emotional issues from childhood... he actually gets off trying to frustrate people. He will pretend to not know what you are saying and even allow himself to look stupid in order to do this, he doesn't care. Really, I'd just let it drop.

Btw, the guy who originally stated that G was running out of PageRank was being sarcastic, so the argument is silly anyways.

-Michael

 

Finally! Some POSITIVE response! Thank you

I'll leave this topic now...

 

I had one URL change, other than that nothing. The SERPs are going well, but I'd still like to see some of the sites improve for PR, especially the new ones. Grrr!

 

hummmmmmm..... See below...

BINGO... We have a winner here.....

 

The number of pages in the index. See the first part of Sutocu's reply below.

By the way, there is no such word as "contrascend". That's the second time you've used it so I assume it's not just a typographical error.

See the quote from Sutoco's reply above.

 

I wasn't talking about the limit of the rank value (1-10)

but all this has already been cleared up as being a sarcastic remark anyway/

Sorry for the typo (contrascend actually condescend), i'll use the word "patronising" when i'm talking about you from now on It is more fitting for you.

 

I love this thread ... it's like the feeble, diseased & dying heart of the now out-dated and unloved tragedy that is PR ....

 

Neither was I.

That didn't clear it up, obviously.

 

Yeah .
Im just wondering. If PR updates, then digitalpoint will be overspammed with "GOT PR x!!" Threads..

 

Any idea when the next Pr update will be?

sorry to ask such a noob question its just ive been waiting since july for my PR to update and I must have just missed the last one.

 

Your dialogue makes no sense. Why don't you use "Private Messages" instead?.