Comments on: Technorati is Irrelevant http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/ Making Sense of the New Media -- Helping You To Be A Better Blogger Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:32:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3 By: Blog Bloke http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1188 Blog Bloke Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:21:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1188 Thanks Beaman. Thanks Beaman.

]]> By: Beaman http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1187 Beaman Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:23:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1187 One referral from Technorati and one from the 2000 Bloggers in the last month. Both hopeless in my book but at least the 2000 was/is fun to use. (depending on where you can find it now)<br/><br/>Nice blog by the way, I'll link to you so I can get back here more often. <br/><br/>Best Wishes. One referral from Technorati and one from the 2000 Bloggers in the last month. Both hopeless in my book but at least the 2000 was/is fun to use. (depending on where you can find it now)

Nice blog by the way, I’ll link to you so I can get back here more often.

Best Wishes.

]]> By: Blog Bloke http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1186 Blog Bloke Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:24:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1186 I'm just warming up. I’m just warming up.

]]> By: Dawud Miracle http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1185 Dawud Miracle Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:53:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1185 Preach on brother Broke. Peach on... Preach on brother Broke. Peach on…

]]> By: Blog Bloke http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1184 Blog Bloke Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:06:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1184 Yes Ian, you dissed me on my own blog without even knowing the facts. That's completely unacceptable and there is a name for that sort of thing but I will spare you any further embarrassment.<br/><br/>You came across as extremely arrogant and got my dander up. Apology accepted but next time you should think twice before trying it again on this blog or anyone else's for that matter.<br/><br/>Regarding ranking, when I created an account with technorati did I also vote to make you or anybody else @ technorati the keeper of the keys to the kingdom? Because I don't recall.<br/><br/>I was of the impression the blogosphere was (or should be) democratic. I guess I was just being naive.<br/><br/>So why do we even need a juvenile ranking system? For whom does it benefit besides creating a blogarchy for the a-listers?<br/><br/>Have you ever watched Wayne's World? Well I happen to think we're all on equal footing and bow down to nobody.<br/><br/><i>"The intention of the ranking system is to provide a measurement of the blogosphere's attention."</i><br/><br/>I would believe that statement if you left your ranking at the post or topic level (like WTF) instead of elevating certain individual bloggers to status level.<br/><br/>Please don't make apologies for being "transparent" because you should be. It would be much worse for technorati if found out after the fact. Just ask Steve Rubel about that.<br/><br/>"It seems that you're suggesting that we kowtow to "A-list buddies". <br/><br/>Well then I guess you are no longer do business with the Steve Rubels et al or Edelman. Silly me.<br/><br/>Cheers and have a great day! Yes Ian, you dissed me on my own blog without even knowing the facts. That’s completely unacceptable and there is a name for that sort of thing but I will spare you any further embarrassment.

You came across as extremely arrogant and got my dander up. Apology accepted but next time you should think twice before trying it again on this blog or anyone else’s for that matter.

Regarding ranking, when I created an account with technorati did I also vote to make you or anybody else @ technorati the keeper of the keys to the kingdom? Because I don’t recall.

I was of the impression the blogosphere was (or should be) democratic. I guess I was just being naive.

So why do we even need a juvenile ranking system? For whom does it benefit besides creating a blogarchy for the a-listers?

Have you ever watched Wayne’s World? Well I happen to think we’re all on equal footing and bow down to nobody.

“The intention of the ranking system is to provide a measurement of the blogosphere’s attention.”

I would believe that statement if you left your ranking at the post or topic level (like WTF) instead of elevating certain individual bloggers to status level.

Please don’t make apologies for being “transparent” because you should be. It would be much worse for technorati if found out after the fact. Just ask Steve Rubel about that.

“It seems that you’re suggesting that we kowtow to “A-list buddies”.

Well then I guess you are no longer do business with the Steve Rubels et al or Edelman. Silly me.

Cheers and have a great day!

]]> By: Ian Kallen http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1183 Ian Kallen Sat, 10 Feb 2007 22:23:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1183 Bloke,<br/>I didn't realize I'd left you waiting for an apology. I'm sorry I lumped you in with those who were enjoying rank manipulation (intentional or not) of 2000 Bloggers links or otherwise disparaged your reputation, that certainly wasn't my intention. Clearly there are a lot of people participating in 2000 Bloggers who didn't give a hoot about the effects on rankings and for those folks, the change in our indexing should have been a non-event. I'm sorry that it came out that I attributed participation in 2000 Bloggers or motivation one way or the other to you.<br/><br/>The other question you asked, "Who was it really hurting?" is a fair one. The question isn't just rhetorical because it goes to the heart of your points suggesting that there are entrenched interests who we're protecting. I don't think anyone was injured per se by any of this. The intention of the ranking system is to provide a measurement of the blogosphere's attention. The rankings are calculated by inbound links from blogs over the preceding 180 days. As time moves on, people move up and down the ranks as the attention that they gather ebbs and flows. The measurement system was skewed by links that don't represent attention in the conventional sense (citations and replies), no one was "hurt"; we simply wanted to correct it. In posting about it, I thought I'd be transparent about the change and its motivations (most search services keep "secret sauce" like Coca Cola keeps its formula). It seems that you're suggesting that we kowtow to "A-list buddies"... well, that's just not true and I doubt anyone at the top of the ranks were ever concerned with any of this.<br/><br/>I'm sure there is fault to be found with our rankings, I've seen few perfect ranking systems. I find the simplicity of ours both a blessing and a curse :) You've stated elsewhere that rankings are "stupid " and "juvenile" so I don't imagine there's much I can say to make you happy about them either way.<br/><br/>Anyway, I'm sorry if there are continued hard feelings on your part, I wish you well.<br/><br/>Take care,<br/>-Ian Bloke,
I didn’t realize I’d left you waiting for an apology. I’m sorry I lumped you in with those who were enjoying rank manipulation (intentional or not) of 2000 Bloggers links or otherwise disparaged your reputation, that certainly wasn’t my intention. Clearly there are a lot of people participating in 2000 Bloggers who didn’t give a hoot about the effects on rankings and for those folks, the change in our indexing should have been a non-event. I’m sorry that it came out that I attributed participation in 2000 Bloggers or motivation one way or the other to you.

The other question you asked, “Who was it really hurting?” is a fair one. The question isn’t just rhetorical because it goes to the heart of your points suggesting that there are entrenched interests who we’re protecting. I don’t think anyone was injured per se by any of this. The intention of the ranking system is to provide a measurement of the blogosphere’s attention. The rankings are calculated by inbound links from blogs over the preceding 180 days. As time moves on, people move up and down the ranks as the attention that they gather ebbs and flows. The measurement system was skewed by links that don’t represent attention in the conventional sense (citations and replies), no one was “hurt”; we simply wanted to correct it. In posting about it, I thought I’d be transparent about the change and its motivations (most search services keep “secret sauce” like Coca Cola keeps its formula). It seems that you’re suggesting that we kowtow to “A-list buddies”… well, that’s just not true and I doubt anyone at the top of the ranks were ever concerned with any of this.

I’m sure there is fault to be found with our rankings, I’ve seen few perfect ranking systems. I find the simplicity of ours both a blessing and a curse :) You’ve stated elsewhere that rankings are “stupid ” and “juvenile” so I don’t imagine there’s much I can say to make you happy about them either way.

Anyway, I’m sorry if there are continued hard feelings on your part, I wish you well.

Take care,
-Ian

]]> By: Craig http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1182 Craig Sat, 10 Feb 2007 19:22:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1182 We found away around the junk in Technorati feeds :-)<br/><br/>https://weblogs.sdn.sap.com/pub/wlg/5749<br/><br/>Craig We found away around the junk in Technorati feeds :-)

https://weblogs.sdn.sap.com/pub/wlg/5749

Craig

]]> By: Blog Bloke http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1181 Blog Bloke Sat, 10 Feb 2007 04:39:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1181 There's always some control freak out there wanting to play God. Democracy needs to be forever vigilant and the Blogosphere is no exception. There’s always some control freak out there wanting to play God. Democracy needs to be forever vigilant and the Blogosphere is no exception.

]]> By: Doug Karr http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1180 Doug Karr Sat, 10 Feb 2007 04:26:00 +0000 http://www.blogbloke.com/technorati-is-irrelevant/#comment-1180 Democracy never works well when a few folks try to 'tweak it', do they? Democracy never works well when a few folks try to ‘tweak it’, do they?

]]>