Human Quality Raters

[100R]

Cateva linkuri ce nu le-am gasit pe aici, daca cineva e interesat sa citeasca

Eric Schmidt “First, we built search for users, not websites, and no matter what we do, there will always be some websites unhappy with where they rank. Search is subjective, and there’s no “correct” set of search results. Our scientific process is designed to provide the answers that consumers will find most useful.”

Google is for USERS – not websites. Google wants to offer the best to it’s USERS – not to each of us site owners.

If webmasters don’t like where they rank – tough. But if USERS don’t like the results they find – BIG problem.

So Google makes it clear that they aim to please USERS and they employ HUMAN Raters to tell them what they find relevant, useful, and spam (among other things). PEOPLE feed the Google algorithm – it’s not quite man vs machine, is it?

Now, yes, Google trains these raters to determine spam, low-quality, etc based on GOOGLE’S guidelines, but it’s still PEOPLE doing it.

former Google Rater - “Yes they have their algorythms designed to get the best sites to the top, but when they do get to the top, they have to be reviewed with a human eye in order to make sure the site has quality. This is the reason the review panel exists and is the reason some of you go from page one to page 10 without warning.”

Google Raters - All About Google Quality Raters | PotPieGirl.com

Can-You-Optimize-for-Googles-Search-Quality-Raters?

How Google Makes Algorithm Changes | PotPieGirl.com

[LexBruckner]

Interesant. Multumesc pentru share!