Need for moving average?

Discussion in 'Co-op Advertising Network' started by chachi, Dec 21, 2004.

  1. #1
    Well, since it appears that the big G is now bouncing API results all over the place, just like the rest of the operators, maybe some kind of moving average would be better to calculate base weight than a single api call? Rather than everyone logging in and pumping the revalidate button a few times per account I figured something else would be a better alternative.

    Maybe G will just mellow out in a week or two. :rolleyes:
     
    chachi, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  2. Patient

    Patient Raider

    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    123
    #2
    Or maybe an average across the 3 biggies: G, MSN, and Yahoo!
     
    Patient, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  3. T0PS3O

    T0PS3O Feel Good PLC

    Messages:
    13,219
    Likes Received:
    777
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    (Let me try a newbie question...) Do they (Y+M) have site: commands?

    And can they be accessed through an API?

    If even one answer is 'no' then it wouldn't work.
     
    T0PS3O, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  4. Patient

    Patient Raider

    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    123
    #4
    Y + M both have site: commands.

    I haven't come across an API for either. Why is that so crucial?
     
    Patient, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  5. SEbasic

    SEbasic Peon

    Messages:
    6,317
    Likes Received:
    318
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    An API for Y! has been talked about for ages...

    Hopefully MSN will be a little quicker in delivering one after the SE has been released.
     
    SEbasic, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  6. T0PS3O

    T0PS3O Feel Good PLC

    Messages:
    13,219
    Likes Received:
    777
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    Else the system has to scrape the results for all the 1000's of sites in the coop network.

    That would make Shawn look bad...
     
    T0PS3O, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  7. Foxy

    Foxy Chief Natural Foodie

    Messages:
    1,614
    Likes Received:
    48
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    Do I detect sarcasm here......tut, tut at Xmas too.....hehehe :)
     
    Foxy, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  8. Patient

    Patient Raider

    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    123
    #8
    Yes I see your point - thats a lot of searches particularly as the network grows. Thinking about it there must also currently be a lot of searches on G given that the sytem validates against indexed pages only.

    However, I find that the coop network works very well in Y and M beta and Y is much more difficult to get yourself spidered so it would possibly be a fair way of establishing weight if this issue could be overcome.

    I guess there is also an issue of whether a site is banned by G - although I guess this also works in reverse as well.
     
    Patient, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  9. T0PS3O

    T0PS3O Feel Good PLC

    Messages:
    13,219
    Likes Received:
    777
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    Albeit seemingly inconsistent, G at the moment is the most transparent too. We can all use the commands that Shawn's system uses to verify Shawn/others aren't cheating and we're all bound by the exact same rules we all know. That's the beauty of G and the API.

    When the parameters are taken from a combination of SE's we'll get even more questions about how the coop works but then can't answer them anymore.
     
    T0PS3O, Dec 21, 2004 IP
  10. chachi

    chachi The other Jason

    Messages:
    1,600
    Likes Received:
    57
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    yeah, I am not advocating using Y! and MSN. I think that some kind of moving average may stabilize the network as well. It can't be good for a site to have 6k BW one day and 67.5K the next.

    Using Y! and MSN is clearly not feasable.
     
    chachi, Dec 21, 2004 IP