7/7/03 - 7/16/04 Rusty Brick [...the brain is a little oxidized also. ]: A moderator on multiple forms and creator of seroundtable "rustybrick" was this week's guest on "search engine radio". "Rusty's" radio personality seemed likable enough, and it is kind of hard to imagine that this is the same jerk who so arrogantly preaches on message boards. Feeling kind of riped-off by Rusty when he closed the thread I was involved in at the search engine weasel forms, I went looking around to see if I could find out who this jerk was. I stumbled across his name as the soon-to-be guest on search engine radio and decided to submit a question. I really didn't think they'd ask the question... but to their credit they did. Here is a transcript of the relevant portion of the broadcast. UpDate: Barry "the brick" doesn't like being disliked and has requested that I "modify" my remarks. We have had a pleasant e-mail exchange and he has asserted that he did not close the SEW thread. He can't say who did but it seems the only logical candidate would be Danny Sullivan himself. In my opinion, rusty certainly helped to push the conversation out the door. The more relevant fact is, Barry made no effort to reopen the thread so his hands are just as dirty. Likewise, even though he is not an active, for-profit, "search engine optimizer" he supplies the industry aid-and-comfort and as George Bush would say. "Be one of us or we will kill you.... all of you... everyone of you.... even your cats!". Although likable, Barry has the heart of a Spamorist and therefore I will exercise my constitutional rights (what's left of them) and say he is a jerk. My last email reply: For me, it is not about personal or hurt feelings, is about lost opportunity and progress squandered by selfish greed. My God is logic, and the only commandment is "thou shall not waste" Spending literally trillions of dollars over the past 10yrs (that is a quote from a web "authority") on a Internet Search Infrastructure that has no logical immunity to rampant fraud is in a word a SIN... a sin against our intelligence and a violation of every honest persons dignity. The big lie is "it's too complex to fix". Funny how websites that need to impose accountability find a rather simple way... ebay's feedback for example. The Internet search industry sucks... because it is designed to suck... corporate greed, scientists who have sold-out their intellectual integrity, and "Web developers" looking for easy seo money have conspired to keep the system broken and them well fed. You celebrate this Internet Catastrophe that has placed a marketing tax on every Click... yet you want me to like you.... fat chance. [Host] speaking of... somebody had e-mailed a question into the show... let me just read you this question... it is kind of related to the search engine industry. "Please inquire of Mr. Schwartz : Estimates range from $3 to $7 billion as the annual cost for Search Engine Exposure Enhancement. Please explain what value the consumer of Internet resources receives in exchange for financing the search engine marketing and optimization industries? " [RB] Ummm........ maybe I missed some of that... I was wondering if you could repeat the first part... I think i... got kind of muffled... [Host] there are some assumptions in the question... but the question is... the question says Estimates range from $3 to $7 billion as the annual cost for Search Engine Exposure Enhancement. Please explain what value the consumer of Internet resources receives in exchange for financing the search engine marketing and optimization industries? " I guess they are assuming that companies are paying money to optimize their sites for search engines and therefore they charge higher prices [RB: right] ... is this a net good for the consumer or the fact that people have spend money to go out and have to market this way maybe... I don't know, how it would you answer that question... [RB] There's I mean ...search engines do not... They have organic results... which is basically the free results and they have their paid results which is the sponsored listings on the top or on the right hand side of the pages... So somebody wants to rank No. 1 for a keyword they could easily join some pay for click program and get their rankings... numb... as high as they like. .. and pay for click for that...um but regards to like manipulating the results based on paying yahoo or google or msn to actually rank you #1 in the actual... in the actual free results that something that... not...not done... and I don't think will ever be done.. because that will lead to less relevant results [right] hiring a search engine optimization firm to help you... as long as long you hire an ethical... up front search engine optimization firm... they will not try to rank you #1 for a keyword that is off topic to your actual web pages. [host: right] all search engine optimization firms want to do is rank you #1 for keywords that are related to you ... and as long as those key words relate to you and to your Web site there is no reason why a searcher wouldn't want to see you for those keywords...um [Host] yeh I mean that's been sort of my take... that companies that put money into trying to rank for a particular keyword related to what they do um.. is kind of like... you know it is like advertising in some ways where the bigger companies can afford to spend more resources on it..right.. so.. overtime the sites that... I mean if you look who ranks for rental cars for example it is usually the big rental car companies.. [RB] right... when it comes to very competitive keywords as well it's only... the more..more money towards link building... to getting keywords with actual anchor text saying rental cars to your website currently is the best way to actually rank well for those keywords... obviously if you have more money... you will rank better for those keywords... so the question is once the big firms actually learn about this... when... how long before the search ... search actually gets less relevant based on those link building..tools [Host] yea link building seems to be the big factor night now. let's talk about link building........... Another funny part of the interview was the discussion of the "interesting" thread about the remarks by Seth Godin ...the irony being Rusty killed that thread. permanent link

7/15/04 In The beginning [... it look-alike the end ]: Unfortunately even the enticement of taking $500 from me hasn't been enough to compel any SEOer to help do the right thing and get "powercons" the search engine exposure it deserves. The good news is I will be able to "market" myself as a "contest winner" ... but I don't think I'll win the big money. permanent link

6/31/03 - 7/7/04 Hit The Weasel [... and WIN my gratitude ]: The great and powerful Oz of Search Engine insight/commentary Danny Sullivan has revealed that behind the curtain is nothing but an unprincipaled wimpy weasel. These message board threads basically tell their own story. Seth Godin: Most SEO Not Worth the Money Signature Policy Is there really anything there to justify "closing" a message board. How ludicrous is the world going to get before someone stands up and says "none of these emperors' are wearing any clothes". Just so it doesn't go to waste, this would have been my next post to the message board if they hadn't closed it. For the most part I would say we are staying on the subject, unfortunately there is an implied judgement in the subject. You can't really answer the question is SEO worth it or "a good thing" without risking offending someone. I am sure the SEO folks who have been called "Black Hatters" are not "happy" with that characterization.... and it provokes the question... if google started supporting, or in every practical way encouraging, the BlackHat techniques, and began ignoring WhiteHat techniques, would you be "happy"? and think "the world is fine". If that day ever comes will you just put on a BlackHat and do is everyone else is doing? Maybe you will find it comforting to give yourself some "libertarian"... "survival of the fittest" peptalk. As I said the last place we met..."I would rather sink in holy water, then swim in sewage" I voiced my objection ( for all of 10 minutes) by posting this message in what they call the "padded room". Of course it was deleted. update: It has been Un-deleted... Thread Closing Personally I find closing a thread to be the most despicable violation of a "human right" that can take place on a message board. You can't win the argument so you'll just pretend it doesn't exist and that it never happened. You've stolen a piece of my life (time I wasted investing in conversation on your message board) with the clearly deceptive promise that you respect free-speech. There really is no other word, you are despicable cowards. Please terminate my "membership" as I won't waste any more words in this stepford community. ...More Updates permanent link

5/25/03 - 6/30/04 Just a Little Distortion [...like being just "a litte pregnant"]: Announcing the donotgo.com SEO-Google contest. The top prize will include between $200 and $500 in cash (dependent on how highly the winning entry "ranks" at google) and a "special gift" valued at $100 (but could be worth millions if I am tragically killed by a falling piece of the Hubble Space Telescope). All contestants will also receive a free customized (to their website) installable version (.exe) of Powercons . The contest will officially start July 15th. Rules: The "winner" will be defined as the person who has the entry that ranks highest on the keyword "bookmarklet" or "bookmarklets" on Sept 1, 2004. If some other entry ranks higher at both yahoo and MSN-- the first prize cash will be split between the two entries. If the winning entry doesn't break the top 50 the top prize will be $100.00. If it reaches the top 20 the cash prize will be $200.00 If it reaches the top 10 the cash prize will be $350.00. If it makes it to the top 3 the cash prize will be $500.00 Contestants will add whatever tags or content they would like to the basic template page-- with the restriction that the basic character of the page is not obscured. Things like invisible taxt and page redirection will not be allowed. "Branding" the page to your website/content is not only permitted, but suggested... but the minor links to the donotgo home page must remain accessible. Contestants will E-mail their entry (html page) as an attachment and it will be uploaded to its permanent (at least one year) home in a subdirectory of this domain (donotgo.com/contest/). Contestants can choose what they would like the page to be named (xxxx_xx.htm) but the name cannot contain the word "bookmarklet". Official Rules, Questions, Answers, Complaints, Commentary... will be posted here. permanent link

4/13/03 - 5/25/04 How Silly Was It [...as silly as a Google principle]: A proposal to help fight deceptive Internet software At Google, we put a lot of thought into improving your online experience. We're alarmed by what we believe is a growing disregard for your rights as computer users. Except for your right to be provided a honest, complete and accurate map of the Internet. We've seen increasing reports of spyware and other applications that trick you in order to serve you pop-up ads, connect your modem to expensive toll numbers or hijack your browser from the site you're trying to visit. I guess your next news flash will be to tell us that you have seen reports that indicate the earth is round. We do not see this trend reversing itself. In fact, it is getting worse. Fortunately the trend isn't as out of control as the proliferation of sponsored links. As a provider of services and monetization for users, advertisers and publishers on the Internet, we feel a responsibility to be proactive about these issues. "provider of services and monetization" interesting way to describe a Spam Pimp. So, we have decided to take action. As a first step, we have outlined a set of principles we believe our industry should adopt and we're sharing them to foster discussion and help solve the problem. In other words, as the mega-pimp, we see a need to protect our turf and would like to sucker you ignorant Internet masses into helping us wipe out the competition. We intend to follow these guidelines ourselves with the applications we distribute (such as the Google Toolbar and Google Deskbar). The fact that google Corp. already retains Global Name Recognition and has absolutely no need, or practical incentive to violate the guidelines, makes Google Corp. a Mega-hypocrite. And because we strongly believe these principles are good for the industry and users worldwide, we will encourage our current and prospective business partners to adopt them as well. Good thing for Google Corp. no meaningful player (left) in the search industry ever strongly believed in the principle that there should be a separation between "mapmakers" and "location promoters." These guidelines are, by necessity, broad. You mean, as a mega-crook, you're afraid to call any lesser crooks, crooks. Software creation and distribution are complex and the technology is continuously evolving. Creation IS complex-- but the only complexity involved in distribution is how to get the middlemen money-whore parasites like google out of the way. As a result, some useful applications may not comply entirely with these principles and some deceptive practices may not be addressed here. Deceptive practices like encouraging people to believe that they are searching the Internet when all they are searching is a data base representation narrowly tailored by collusion, popularity and money. This document is only a start, and focuses on the areas of Internet software and advertising. Advertising is nothing but a useless, socially destructive, progress retarding, TAX on availability/ distribution. These guidelines need to be continually updated to keep pace with ever-changing technology. You need to update your guidelines with the realization that the real problem is the never-changing greed of googles paid clients-- the snake oil salesman and the carnival pitchmen. We look forward to an ongoing discussion with you and with our partners. We would like to hear your suggestions to improve and update these principles. I suggest throwing your principles out and embrace the "principle" that selling a lie, is actually worse than just telling lie. Please send your comments to software-principles@google.com . More likely to get action shoving the comments up my cat's butt. INSTALLATION We believe software should not trick you into installing it. It should be clear to you when you are installing or enabling software on your computer and you should have the ability to say no. An application shouldn't install itself onto your computer secretly or by hiding within another program you're installing or updating. You should be conspicuously notified of the functions of all the applications in a bundle. right... and you shouldn't stick knives and other people's heads or shove things up your cats butt... we also shouldn't have to endure patronizing, pompous babal from hypocrite corporations. UPFRONT DISCLOSURE When an application is installed or enabled, it should inform you of its principal and significant functions. And if the application makes money by showing you advertising, it should clearly and conspicuously explain this. This information should be presented in a way that a typical user will see and understand -- not buried in small print that requires you to scroll. For example, if the application is paid for by serving pop-up ads or sending your personal data to a third party, that should be made clear to you. Survey Data would indicate that "typical users" don't understand that google has essentially sold-out exposure [existence] on the Internet to popularity and/or the highest bidder. Where does Google "clearly and conspicuously" inform the user that IT is monitoring use, and where does Google Corp explain what it does with the information collected. SIMPLE REMOVAL It should be easy for you to figure out how to disable or delete an application. The process should try to remove sufficient components to disable all functions of the application, visible or not, without messing up your computer. Once an application is disabled or deleted, it should not remain active or be automatically enabled later by itself or another application. That is almost as obvious as the fact that the country [Government] that landed a man on the moon should be able to create a simple honest Internet index. CLEAR BEHAVIOR Applications that affect or change your user experience should make clear they are the reason for those changes. For example, if an application opens a window, that window should identify the application responsible for it. Applications should not intentionally obscure themselves under multiple or confusing names. You should be given means to control the application in a straightforward manner, such as by clicking on visible elements generated by the application. If an application shows you ads, it should clearly mark them as advertising and inform you that they originate from that application. If an application makes a change designed to affect the user experience of other applications (such as setting your home page) then those changes should be made clear to you. More obvious "thou shalt not" mush. SNOOPING If an application collects or transmits your personal information such as your address, you should know. We believe you should be asked explicitly for your permission in a manner that is obvious and clearly states what information will be collected or transmitted. For more detail, it should be easy to find a privacy policy that discloses how the information will be used and whether it will be shared with third parties. ...But if a jerk creates a web page exposing your personal information don't go complaining to Google Corp. for making it easily accessible. KEEPING GOOD COMPANY Application providers should not allow their products to be bundled with applications that do not meet these guidelines. Many internet users find that over time their computers become loaded with unwanted software - be it adware, spyware or just plain junk. This is because a few applications they installed came bundled with junk, and that junk generated more junk piled higher and deeper. We believe any situation where multiple applications are being installed should be made very clear to users, so that if you were to ask them several months later - "What's this?" - most will know where it came from and why it is there. Do you think "most [users] will know where "the Google cookie" came from and why it is there"? Usually there are complex business relationships among the companies participating in a bundle. This can result in well-intentioned companies benefiting from the distribution or revenue generated by software that does not benefit you. Getting paid to distribute, or paying money to be distributed with undesirable software enables more undesirable software. Responsible software makers and advertisers can work to prevent such distribution by avoiding these types of business relationships, even if they are through intermediaries. Kind of like how googles page rank toolbar "enables" undesirable spoofing of googles popularity algorithm. We are alarmed by the size of this problem, which we estimate to be causing hundreds of millions of dollars to be changing hands annually. Because of this magnitude and user impact, strong action by the industry is imperative. "hundreds of millions of dollars " Yet, no doubt less than the amount google steals every year selling content providers the effective right to publish on the Internet. We believe that it is in our users' and the industry's interest to work to eliminate this problem. For this reason, we will strive to distribute our software only in bundles where all applications meet the above guidelines, and we think users will benefit if others in our industry do the same. Coming from a company that has control over millions of eyeballs a day and therefore has no exposure or distribution problems this is disgustingly insincere tripe. Kind of like a man promising never to personally have an abortion.... or a billionaire promising to "strive" not to be a shoplifter. Good Google Grief ! permanent link

2/14/03 - 4/12/04 Only 600 miles from the Internet [on the Google Link Ecom-way]: My now, years old, inMendham.com domain is now ranked by Google in the 600's on the keyword Mendham. Teoma ranks the site 31st and Yahoo's "all the Web" appropriately ranks the site 4th. If the IPO speculation is to be believed Googles algorithm is supposed to be worth billions of dollars -- obviously I wouldn't pay 2¢ for it. Some might argue that googles poor performance on the keyword Mendham [leaves the best content site on the Internet, on the subject, out of the top 600 listings.] just might be an aberration. Maybe so... but the circumstantial evidence leads me to the conclusion that the problem is likely pervasive. No doubt I have antagonized google with commentary on this site, and I did even send them an e-mail threatening legal action over their discriminatory "Google Grants" program. [narrowed participation to nonreligious non-political tax-exempt 501(c)(3) only organizations] Quote: To whom it may concern, I provide this correspondence to serve as notice of my intention to initiate legal action in federal court claiming that Google Corp. has, and is, violating the constitutionally protected rights of the individuals and organizations it is denying fair-and-equal exposure to the Internet public. Through consolidation, and monopoly dominance, Google Corp. has acquired an enhanced responsibility commensurate with its "in effect" reality as a vital public utility. I believe the legal case can be made that this heightened responsibility denies Google corporation the luxury and freedom to discriminate based on any narrow, convenient, or personal bigotries. For example, regarding "Google Grants": 501(c)(3) TAX EXEMPT status, is neither a government sanction, nor a legitimate instrument through which to determine entitlement, or right to enhanced Internet Accessibility. Likewise I believe your discrimination against religious and political organizations violates fundamental constitutional rights If you have any facts or argument mitigating against the legal viability of this claim, please provide those facts or argument. Sincerely, Some might argue that google is just getting revenge against me by poorly ranking my inMendham.com domain. I would argue that the logical incentive would be for google to do just the opposite and make sure my websites receive fair ranking--as getting caught engineering a deliberately pour ranking to attack free-speech would put google in substantial legal jeopardy. The circumstantial evidence, defending the assumption of a pervasive problem, that I find most compelling is the fact that it seems a bizarre coincidence that one of my [a person who has advocated against commercial corruption of the science of search for years] own web sites would just "coincidentally" be victim of a "rare" google algorithm aberration that substantiates that advocacy. There is no coincidence, because there's nothing rare about googles poor performance. permanent link

12/2/03 - 2/13/04 Internet Worms [taking us hook line and sinker]: Maybe it isn't so much a slimy worm story, as it is a stupid fish story. So everyone is comfortable with a $3 billion dollar "search industry" tax-- I suppose relative to the $820 million Stupid Martian Rock Tax, paying $3 billion a year to have the indexes of the Internet Spamed and Snake Oiled makes some sense.... but only to stupid fish who haven't much gray matter between their mouth and asshole. Enough of the stupid fish metaphor and onto the really insane, incoherent rant. After 44 years of unpleasant, and inadvertent study of the gluttonous human race I've come to the conclusion that "people" just aren't gonna figure out that their brain isn't just a personal scheming tool, and that it has the potential to serve a far greater purpose-- But in a world that offers the fascination of a contrived, sneaky peek, at a almost naked celebrity breast-- how can the boring intellectual pursuit of defining goals and refining system design, for the improvement of the human condition, compete. So I officially declare you all hopeless self-absorbed morons (in fairness I officially have declared myself insane) Who cares right! In a few years when the Terrorism War destroys civilization no one's gonna be reading this incoherent crap anyway. The simple truth is these words, yes these words here, are as distant from serving their intended purpose as "serious commentary" as google is from the "search engine" it's propagandized to be or that the Internet public deserves.... so take the bait, swallow the hook, and get yourselves reeled in and processed into a pop culture commodity-- after all, it's your civic duty to make sure the capitalist fisherman always have the incentive to throw another hook. Next week I will give you a full report on what my neighbors dog has been telling me. permanent link

11/20/03 - 12/1/03 Walk a crooked mile [smile a crooked smile]: It requires no "rocket science" degree to appreciate the simple wisdom, and truth, in the statement; "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line" in promise the Internet was going to be the greatest line straightiner in the history of mankind-- even eclipsing the invention of the round wheel in helping us achieve a kind of perfect efficiency. In ideal dreams of a decade ago, some of us marveled at the world to come. A world where everywhere the line between production and consumption would be clean, pure and "straight". The Internets' cyber earth, was to remove us from the limitations of the space time continuum. "Distance" was to become a historical curiosity, as we were to be enabled to get anything from anywhere, anytime without wasting any energy. On cyber earth the real world drags of "local availability" the "agent" the "middleman" the "marketing professional" were to be revealed for what they are, crooked constructions, that have no place on a straight line. Obviously something went terribly wrong in the process of the conversion from dream to reality. On the current Internet it seems the only things that are thriving are the very things we should be free to live without. The disaster seems the maximum possible catastrophe. Instead of a perfectly straight line it's as if every inch of cyberspace has a piece of the crooked line on it. E-mail has become unreliable, inefficient and even dangerous. Accessibility has become completely dependent on the creation of artificial popularity (rank) that is bought or manufactured. Every click has been monetized, and with every click the ROI tax increments a notch higher. In theory cyber physics should create natural law that shows a bias for the straight line and makes everything else ultimately unsustainable. The problem is, we let the "crooked liners" get into the infrastructure early and rewrite the straight line rules. By removing an accountability screw here, and an integrity nail there they succeeded in making the straight line physics fall apart. I adamantly claim that all of this is easily fixed, and that we still can have the dream. We have the technology to replace a screw, and rehammer a nail. The problem is, it's one of those "we" have to do it things. Just as I can't elect a president with a brain for you, I can't fix the Internet for you-- You have to want it, and You have to help do it. A first step might be to ask yourself the question-- If you were a Indian, would you follow a map a yahoo cowboy gave you... even if his name was Billy-Bob-Google? ---------------------------------------- Sorry, nothing but trite propaganda to link to. "Google is one of the best things to happen to the Net" "But Google Watch and other search watchdog sites" permanent link

11/13/03 - 11/19/03 Hate Microsoft [ ... but do use IE]: A few months back I thought of the idea of using .js files to create an alternative version of my powercons toolbox. I kind of let it drop because I thought Netscape's new browser might change browser demographics and make working on the idea a waste of time. There being no radical change, I did some work on the idea this week and am using a few of the pages on this site to experiment. The experiment seems to be working [at least with my 5.0 I E browser] . If it's working for you, a powercons toolbox should have been loaded on this page "automatically" and if this is not the first donotgo.com page you visited today or if you recently installed the installable version of the toolbox it should have loaded fairly quickly. This new .js concept enables webmasters to easily include the functionality of the toolbox on there websites simply by adding this small script to the bottom of their web pages. <center><a href="donotgo.com/book.htm" target=_blank><IMG name="dng" SRC="file:///C:\Program Files\Powercons\dnglogo.jpg" WIDTH=120 HEIGHT=17 BORDER=0></a></center> <script language="Javascript" src="http://donotgo.com/powergt.js"></script> The real innovation here, is that the script first trys to load a toolbox from the "clients" hard drive (if they have recently installed the installed version) thus eliminating any use of server-side bandwidth. If the "client" doesn't have the installed version the script loads the online version, which will be slow to load the first time it is requested, but will load very fast thereafter [depending on their version of I E and how it cache's content]. I have always thought that the Internet should have been laid out with bandwidth saving - "commonly used" -centrally located, modular components. Every graphic, and functional component of a webpage does not need to be unique, and virtual oceans of time could be saved, if users were not obligated to constantly redownload what is essentially redundancy. The fact is our clients side computers are quite capable of storing and quickly producing a lot more of website infrastructure, and we should all encourage more development. If it ain't working for you, let me know here. permanent link

10/25/03 - 11/12/03 Google Grief [Welcome to internet hell Charlie Brown]: For the last few months I've just been prodding along waiting for the google IPO train I know is waiting at the end of the tunnel. I keep asking myself, is the Internet dead yet--is the Internet dead yet ... knowing that I can't choose another life track until I am sure that the miles I have walked on this one were "for-sure" wasted. In spite of the fact that there are only a few spam-less pieces of the Internet dream left for a google IPO to runover --I still can't let go, and just move on. Taking a closer look at some of the debris scattered neer me on the "Information Superspamway" --sometimes, like with clouds-- I can see interesting, even entertaining shapes. My E-Mail box for example has lost its identity as a functional two-way communication device--but in the debris you can see, without looking very "long" or "hard" a pretty pitiful, yet still funny characterization of humanity. The really weird thing is there seems a method to the spam mail madness. Like how you can almost feel your teeth rot looking at a picture of cotton candy, you can feel your psychology being warped by the constant Spam-gestions. Since the government won't pass any laws against lying shysterizum, maybe they will "solve" the problem by mandating a warning. "Warning: prolonged exposure to e-mail may increase the chances of you becoming psychologically obsessed with finding a quick fix for the fact that you are in debt, old, fat, and inadequate." Even without billions in IPO "fun money" google is leaving a pretty big corporate footprint all over the Internet debris field. I keep wondering why there's no panic, no cries for help, its like everyone's just lining up for the slaughter. Maybe google is just too damn cute, even when it's acting like a 700 foot guerrilla, for most people to see the nature of the beast. Regardless, it's hard to explain how no one can see the carnage left behind. Long praised as some kind of honest, different, search engine, because it didn't have ad's plastered all over its home page--google is now plastering its ads all over the Internet. Sorry ...but I can't see how this is a better alternative. I sometimes forget that the public is in a media induced coma and that I should not be fooled into thinking that the "public" has any representation among the Spam-zombies roaming the visible streets of the Internet. Zombies don't panic, and as opportunistic parasites it seems reasonable that they would see advantage in the mess a hungry 700 foot guerrilla could make. The relationship is truly symbiotic, the zombies' create an everything's-all-right impression, and the guerrilla never has to worry about being contained. So close is the relationship the zombies will even gleefully eat what would be described as, kind of stinky "PR Excrement", if it was produced by any other monster. This week Google "unloaded" a "Very clever" piece of stuff called a Deskbar and boy did the zombies go for it. Apparently this Deskbar enables you to Search using Google, even when your browser isn't running-- So what? I can do a google search when my computer is rebooting? I mean, when else is the browser not running? For those of you who see a point in loading half your Internet explorer web browser to do a google search from the task bar-- Why use googles digested version when you can get something that was much more of a "deserves credit" innovation, here. Of course, If you want an Internet explorer browser "manifestation" that is innovative and more useful try Powercons. I wonder how many seconds it takes for googles deskbar page to receive more page views than powercons has received in a year? In the center of one of googles footprints, is the injured but not yet dead remains of my InMendham.com domain. Amongst the scattered debris are curious bits of google algorithm that make me wonder was this stomping just stupid google-being-google or was this direct hit no accident. Websites that use "frames" to create more user/bandwidth friendly site navigation have been around a longtime. Other search engines seem capable of understanding the concept and don't routinely rank menu pages higher than content pages --Yet for some reason google just doesn't get it. It is bad enough that you have to wade through more than 55 results on the keyword "Mendham" before you'll find any InMendham.com page --but Why would this garden club sub-page menu be one of the highest ranked pages? Even harder to figure out is how does this nothing page rate coming up as the 11th result. The page only contains the image of an address and phone number, and an e-mail address. Using googles "links:" function google lists only one external link to the page (of course google doesn't acknowledge the link from my site or from dumboz) so without any external source of rank all you've got is an "alt tag" on the page with no other apparent content. It seems impossible that google would give this much ranking weight to what has become a commonly spammed archaic left-over tag from the days of the lowban Internet. More telling then the fact that google can't rationally, or appropriately rank inMendham.com or any of its pages is the fact that google does spider the domain but than doesn't index some of its pages. This simple html message board, for example, is not on the Web google will let you search. Why? Even when I link to individual pages like this one google continues to insist it is not there. A truly disturbing fact is, this message board is the only place on the Internet local residents could find any information whatsoever regarding a rather important local controversy-- so much for the dream of a public interest Internet. permanent link