Re: [OT] Googling...

[Arnt Karlsen <arnt@c2i.net>]

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:17:01 +0100 (CET), 
Pedro Hernandez <phph109@yahoo.es> wrote in message 
<[🔎] 20040122171701.44299.qmail@web41709.mail.yahoo.com>:

>  --- Johann Koenig <explosive@hvc.rr.com> escribió: > On Thursday
> January 22 at 08:34am
> > Hugo Vanwoerkom <hvw59601@care2.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Question I have: who would think of searching for "miserable
> > failure",
> > > or perhaps does Google leak its hidden motives? Or are they?
> > 
> > Google has a rating system, that is partially based on how many
> > people
> > follow certain links when searching for certain things. Therefore,
> > if people search for 'miserable failure' and go through the results
> > (or send google false/doctored urls, etc) and click GW's site, it
> > raises the
> > points for said site for said search. Now, if a lot of people do
> > this,
> > they can move it all the way up to #1 (which is why 'I'm feeling
> > lucky
> > goes to it)
> 
> So how come that searching for 'miserable failure' lists a page (GWB
> bio) as number one, when that page contains none of the words in the
> search? Is that becaus people "send google false/doctored urls"
> (whatever that means)?

..or, could it be a sign from God?  ;-)  

-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.