<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BREAKING NEWS: Google Search Wiki</title>
	<atom:link href="http://buildandearn.com/breaking-news-google-search-wiki/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://buildandearn.com/breaking-news-google-search-wiki/</link>
	<description>Build Websites. Earn Money. Love Life.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 23:21:37 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kirk</title>
		<link>http://buildandearn.com/breaking-news-google-search-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-18204</link>
		<dc:creator>Kirk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://buildandearn.com/?p=202#comment-18204</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think this is anything near &quot;a completely new algo&quot; as it&#039;s simply a couple new kinds of click tied to your google account or cookie or however they track people.

What this will do is enlist the help of EVERY google user to provide the human intelligence that bots can never deliver.

Here&#039;s the difference I see in my search experience:

As a seasoned internet marketer, I know sites that were built to make a buck and it&#039;s frustrating to me when they dominate the listings versus the real content sites I&#039;m after.  The google bots have a limit to their abilities and people have become great at SEO to the point where, to a guy like me, they are missing a bunch of site that I consider spam.  

Now I can demote the adsense sites, BANs sites, phpbay sites, ezine artiles, etc from my results when searching for real authoritative information.  The only kind of SEO trickery that will &quot;work&quot; on me is to provide great content.  

Of course that&#039;s exactly what Google wants at the top of their listings.  

Genius.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think this is anything near &#8220;a completely new algo&#8221; as it&#8217;s simply a couple new kinds of click tied to your google account or cookie or however they track people.</p>
<p>What this will do is enlist the help of EVERY google user to provide the human intelligence that bots can never deliver.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the difference I see in my search experience:</p>
<p>As a seasoned internet marketer, I know sites that were built to make a buck and it&#8217;s frustrating to me when they dominate the listings versus the real content sites I&#8217;m after.  The google bots have a limit to their abilities and people have become great at SEO to the point where, to a guy like me, they are missing a bunch of site that I consider spam.  </p>
<p>Now I can demote the adsense sites, BANs sites, phpbay sites, ezine artiles, etc from my results when searching for real authoritative information.  The only kind of SEO trickery that will &#8220;work&#8221; on me is to provide great content.  </p>
<p>Of course that&#8217;s exactly what Google wants at the top of their listings.  </p>
<p>Genius.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Root</title>
		<link>http://buildandearn.com/breaking-news-google-search-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-18203</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Root</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://buildandearn.com/?p=202#comment-18203</guid>
		<description>Rob,

This certainly is very interesting, and to be honest, there wouldn&#039;t be much point in not gathering the data from users and applying it to the global search results.

I find myself asking one major question...

What if another site that has better information on a topic comes out but you have already selected an older site (which was the best at one point) to be at the top of your results?  Does this mean that I will never be turned on to the new and improved site?  Or, will Google somehow find a way to work it in and get my attention?

This development sure is mind boggling from an SEO perspective.  I&#039;d like to get your thoughts on this via phone or chat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rob,</p>
<p>This certainly is very interesting, and to be honest, there wouldn&#8217;t be much point in not gathering the data from users and applying it to the global search results.</p>
<p>I find myself asking one major question&#8230;</p>
<p>What if another site that has better information on a topic comes out but you have already selected an older site (which was the best at one point) to be at the top of your results?  Does this mean that I will never be turned on to the new and improved site?  Or, will Google somehow find a way to work it in and get my attention?</p>
<p>This development sure is mind boggling from an SEO perspective.  I&#8217;d like to get your thoughts on this via phone or chat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
