OT - Google "failure"

Once again google proves itself to be the most reliable and accurate search
engine available.

Art, 10/24/2006, 11:27:42 AM,
<Ohq%g.14433$Y24.13576@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Once again google proves itself to be the most reliable and accurate
> search engine available.[/color]

Are you referring to this article about how Google is manipulating
search results to put unfavorable opinions of Republican candidates at
the top of its pages?
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us/politics/26googlebomb.html[/url]

--
"I do not belong to any organised political party: I'm a democrat." ~
Will Rogers

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0esxj2f4oie4700c@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Art, 10/24/2006, 11:27:42 AM,
> <Ohq%g.14433$Y24.13576@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Once again google proves itself to be the most reliable and accurate
>> search engine available.[/color]
>
> Are you referring to this article about how Google is manipulating
> search results to put unfavorable opinions of Republican candidates at
> the top of its pages?
> [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us/politics/26googlebomb.html[/url]
>[/color]

According to that article, it is not Google that is manipulating the search
results, it is a liberal group blogger.

At the top of the list of results when you google the word "failure" you get
a link to an explanation from Google's Director of Consumer Web Products
about googlebombing.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

On 26 Oct 2006 18:22:19 GMT, "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Art, 10/24/2006, 11:27:42 AM,
><Ohq%g.14433$Y24.13576@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Once again google proves itself to be the most reliable and accurate
>> search engine available.[/color]
>
>Are you referring to this article about how Google is manipulating
>search results to put unfavorable opinions of Republican candidates at
>the top of its pages?
>[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us/politics/26googlebomb.html[/url][/color]

That says nothing of the sort.

I suggest you read the article again and ask for help with the hard
parts.

Ray O, 10/26/2006, 2:38:57 PM,
<9f21c$454100dc$44a4a10d$25243@msgid.meganewsservers.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0esxj2f4oie4700c@news.readfreenews.net...[color=green]
> > Art, 10/24/2006, 11:27:42 AM,
> ><Ohq%g.14433$Y24.13576@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > > Once again google proves itself to be the most reliable and
> > > accurate search engine available.[/color]
> >
> > Are you referring to this article about how Google is manipulating
> > search results to put unfavorable opinions of Republican candidates
> > at the top of its pages?
> > [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us/politics/26googlebomb.html[/url]
> >[/color]
>
> According to that article, it is not Google that is manipulating the
> search results, it is a liberal group blogger.
>
> At the top of the list of results when you google the word "failure"
> you get a link to an explanation from Google's Director of Consumer
> Web Products about googlebombing.[/color]

I read the article and saw what you are talking about but I also know
Google's founders are admitted liberals. If they didn't approve of
this they could find ways to prevent others manipulating their data.

Since Art didn't expound upon his original statement I had to make an
assumption he was referring to this story. Maybe he can enlighten us
later as to his intention.

Say, what are you doing in this thread anyway?

--
"The people who vote decide nothing. The people who count the votes
decide everything." ~ Josef Stalin

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0esxjtv4pm0xk00d@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Ray O, 10/26/2006, 2:38:57 PM,
> <9f21c$454100dc$44a4a10d$25243@msgid.meganewsservers.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:xn0esxj2f4oie4700c@news.readfreenews.net...[color=darkred]
>> > Art, 10/24/2006, 11:27:42 AM,
>> ><Ohq%g.14433$Y24.13576@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Once again google proves itself to be the most reliable and
>> > > accurate search engine available.
>> >
>> > Are you referring to this article about how Google is manipulating
>> > search results to put unfavorable opinions of Republican candidates
>> > at the top of its pages?
>> > [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us/politics/26googlebomb.html[/url]
>> >[/color]
>>
>> According to that article, it is not Google that is manipulating the
>> search results, it is a liberal group blogger.
>>
>> At the top of the list of results when you google the word "failure"
>> you get a link to an explanation from Google's Director of Consumer
>> Web Products about googlebombing.[/color]
>
> I read the article and saw what you are talking about but I also know
> Google's founders are admitted liberals. If they didn't approve of
> this they could find ways to prevent others manipulating their data.[/color]

That does make sense.
[color=blue]
>
> Since Art didn't expound upon his original statement I had to make an
> assumption he was referring to this story. Maybe he can enlighten us
> later as to his intention.
>
> Say, what are you doing in this thread anyway?
>[/color]

Sorry, lost my head ;-)
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 14:17:24 -0500, "Ray O"
<rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote:
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>>
>> I read the article and saw what you are talking about but I also know
>> Google's founders are admitted liberals. If they didn't approve of
>> this they could find ways to prevent others manipulating their data.[/color]
>
>That does make sense.[/color]

Google takes a hands-off approach to this, just as they say in the
article.

They don't shape the results according to a political agenda, liberal
or conservative.