Sometimes Threadwatch Puts Matt Cutts In Foul Mood

Source Title:
Story Text:

From Matt's blog post on what he likes and what he would like to see from bloglines:

As far as I can tell, you can only accumulate 200 posts from a feed before posts start dropping on the floor. Mark Fletcher, can you boost that to 400 or 500? I don’t want to have to check ThreadWatch that often; sometimes it puts me in a foul mood, so I’d rather save it up for a while and then read it all at once.

He also mentions something else that irks him earlier in his post:

I don’t have to worry about funky spelling, capitalization, or a name that sounds close to “Google” (pet peeve of mine).

And then Matt goes on to capitalize the "W" in TW. What's with that Matt?



Certainly there's a lot of

Certainly there's a lot of open criticism of Google, especially on certain issues.

It's good to see Matt does still take notice of Threadwatch, though, not least that I don't believe Threadwatch is necessarily anti-Google, just that it doesn't pull punches when it comments on any topic or company.

just that it doesn't pull punches

I have to agree with you, Brian.

I find it out that people in/with power seem to expect no criticism. Sort of "sycophants rule". I never could understand why pointing out the cons is not considered helpful rather than something to be avoided by them.

Certainly WMW appears to brook nothing said against G. Whereas TW is, shall we say, livlier on the subject. Call me biased, but the critics of G here have had a point in their postings.

Hey, how about 302s and the dup filter, or the Accelerator.

When you look at British politicians, both Thatcher and Blair surrounded themselves with admirers who whould never say "boo" to the goose. Was Mrs T's undoing in the end!

It's not unreasonable that

It's not unreasonable that he gets annoyed with TW, we are sometimes pretty unfair, but that said if Google actually entered into proper conversations (rather than half-arsed ones where GG answers when he wants to and not when he doesn't) then things could be very different.

If they don't want a conversation then that's fine of course (perhaps some a-lister will blog about that rather than Dell customer service one day?) but there's no giant corporate which doesn't have some negative opinion about it and Google are pretty lucky that they have some constant sources of honest feedback imho.

Anyway - he doesn't get that annoyed by TW because he's quite happy to send a link this way, and not even using a nofollow :)


I am pretty sure a great many of the people who read here make a sizeable portion of thier income as direct result of interaction with google on some level. So when we criticize here it's with the goal of helping Google be one of the best search engines around, and helping ourselves in the process. When we feel the big G has gone off snipe hunting it's just a bit of tough love, and calling it like we see it.

"Certainly WMW appears to brook nothing said against G"

Most bizarre comment of the year, so far.

In terms of attacks on Google, nothing matches WMW for volume, even if most of the attacks are from not very knowledgable people.

Certainly WMW appears to brook nothing ...

including .. GASP ... the capital crime of actually inserting hard line breaks into posts for easier reading.

Spiraling in self-referentialism

I threw that in there because I knew TW/NickW would get a kick out of it. Funnily enough, I'm in exactly the situation that I described: TW had 198 unread posts in Bloglines, so I'm clearing out the queue of things to read because after 200 things, start dropping on the floor. So far, I'm not in a bad mood, but I do have 18 tabs open in Firefox to read, and I'm only about 1/3rd of the way done. I'm sure something will make me grumpy before I'm done reading; if not the TW posts, then all those habanero peppers I had earlier this evening.

BTW, I don't think of TW as anti-Google. More like anti-every-search-engine, a little bit? :) You folks know the vibe here--lively but sometimes a bit critical. Sorry about ThreadWatch instead of Threadwatch. But the logo is threadwatch (no caps at all). Which is it, anyway: threadwatch or Threadwatch?

I always write it

I always write it Threadwatch or TW, but i don't personally care much how people write it - it's just a name, capitalization doesn't matter too much as long as it's understandable :)

>anti every search engine

hehe, definately not - but yes on the critical - of almost everything i guess hehe..

>18 tabs

sheesh, that's a LOT of stuff - best start breaking out the valium now i reckon...

Critical? Enjoy!

*Constructive* criticism is like gold dust dear boy ;O)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.