Wanker Interviews Matt Cutts

29 comments

Nick W recently interviewed Matt Cutts, chatting search, blogs and splogs.

Comments

That's Mr. Wanker to you

That's Mr. Wanker to you Aaron :-)

More from Signor Wanker

Said wanker also posted this the other day - 'Why Bloggers Don't Need SEO' - so wotcha doing trying to buy links from Mr Cutts, eh?

my sad attempt at a little

my sad attempt at a little humor im afrad mat heh..

LMFAO. Aaron, I think you

LMFAO. Aaron, I think you are trying very hard to get the ol "TW feel" in your posts but somehow, even for a swearing limey arsehole like me, the title seems a little like you are trying too hard and seems out of place.

Even if Nick IS a wanker LOL :P

Anyway off to read it now, thanks for the heads up on Nick's piece with Matt

Happy #5000 post - Wankers

Happy #5000 post - Wankers

Yep, Aaron - Nick's voice is

Yep, Aaron - Nick's voice is uniquely his own. :)

FWIW, Aaron asked me in IM

FWIW, Aaron asked me in IM about the title - I thought it was pretty funny so told him to go right ahead :)

Not that he needs to ask permission to call me a wanker, no one else ever bothers heh!

Great a swearword! Eurotrash

Great a swearword! Eurotrash come and gives us some more you Scottish tosspot. NickW will be #1 for wanker on the SE's and rightly so.

Since swearing is required....

A more American flavor needed in light of the new ownership.. "Cock Knocker" or "AssHat" perhaps ? That latter is a bit strong though..

Also..

More on topic does the world really need another Matt Cutts interview ? The guy is interesting and all but pretty much seems tapped out for new insights. Lets give him a 3 month vacation and see what he has to say then.

check check check

remove dates from the url - check

Aaron, Screw check, check,

Aaron, Screw check, check, check.

I prefer cheque, cheque, cheque. It is all about money at the end of the day :)

Isn't "check" is just an

Isn't "check" is just an American version of the same notion? ;-)

And indeed, what's the story with everybody interviewing Matt Cutts nowadays? no way there couldn't be any more people to interview...

I agree webprofessor. I'm

I agree webprofessor. I'm just about interviewed out, unless something new comes up. ;)

I'm wankin' it dude!

"I agree webprofessor. I'm just about interviewed out, unless something new comes up". ;)

So, through what channels will Google be answering our still unanswered questions? Blogs? Updated webmaster guideline pages? Support?

Note: I was having trouble with Froogle yesterday, got much response from the Froogle team and was happy to see I was talking to (emailing) a human who even went the extra step to take a screenshot of my barrel and show that it was #16 when you do a search for it. It was nice even if they still can’t answer the question “why do I not see the same result on my end”, when I do the same search my barrel is nowhere to be found, grrr oh well. Is Froogle peronalized search by default via zip code?

Props to this live service G, I will start spamming them more and Matt Cutts less now, I also give props to Matt for stepping outside of the fort for a few months.

I have the list of still unanswered questions if Matt or someone else wants to take a look. ;)

WebProfessor, do you live in SF?

Being an American I'm not sure I've heard people call each other "Cock Knocker"s before but I could see how the denizens of Castro St. might find that an endearing term so I assume it's a micro-regional sort of thing.

Now "Fart Knocker" on the other hand is heard bandied about most anywhere.

Here's some viral vernacular..

All these myopic drones who think Christmas celebrates the birth of Matt = nutswingers.

That said, anyone who publishes a Matt interview these days is drawing some nice IBL's, so good on you, Nick.

Getting Links

With what could be called the "Matt Hook"

yeah, so back to that interview thingy

So Nick gets Matt to say a few things I have not noticed prior:

Quote:
Controversial posts are sure to build links, but too many controversial posts may undermine your credibility... A single creative idea that catches fire in the blogosphere or digg.com is probably more useful than just chasing/buying/trading links. Original information or research is great bait to attract links.
Quote:
...[AdSense] section targeting...In essence, you can mark out the heart of a page with your post and suggest that the ads tailor to that. You can also specifically carve out sections of the page to ignore. So if you've got a navbar or section that has lots of bloggy words like "blogroll" or "linkblog" then you could exclude that section of the page.

Such an fresh awareness of trust and authority... over and over we witness Matt's cognitive filter cutting ot the chase on trust and authority, no?

Links are good, but links are being addressed for weighting/rate-limiting according to G's best attempts at determining trust and authority. Content is good, but G will balance with metrics of guessed trust and authority. IF there is a plexwide ™ focus on trust and authority, Matt et al. cut to the chase in their personal analytics, thinking thru probable ways to accomplish X or Y (interview questions) without tripping a trust check, or with an added plus gained from authority cues.

Nick thinks he mistitled that post. I don't.

American Cock-Knockers

Cock-knocker was alive and well in the U.S. Army in '83, and I'm sure it was around long before that. As was swinging-dick and oxygen-thief (one of my personal favorites).

The word 'Splog' still makes me want to yack.

The most interesting comment in the interview was 'If you've got any kind of coding experience, try to build a search engine yourself. You'd be amazed'. Dead on. If you haven't built one yet, give it a go. Index this thread and another billion or so pages and see if Matt's name ranks for asshat, cock-knocker or wanker. ;)

Even a little-bitty LSA-based engine should be able to pull that out of the index. Google ranks TW #1 for 'matt cutts wanker'. I wonder if Boser is happy seeing his name come up #1 for that phrase. ;)

<strong>Matt Cutts Wanker</strong>

Matt Cutts Wanker

Too funny!

;)

I stand corrected!

If someone from the US Army says "COCK KNOCKER" was a term they used then I'll just defer to the old adage "Don't Ask. Don't Tell".

Matts' comment about Blogger are amusing as "Google actually has a pretty good story to tell here" if a good story to tell is that it's underfeatured compared to almost any blog software in the known universe and has it's content indexed faster by Yahoo and MSN than Google itself in the main search index.

Well, you just keep deluding yourself Matt, I'd have stock option blindness if I was in your shoes as well ;)

Cock Knocker

I think for me I picked up the term when I was in the Navy.

John...
Any observations on how they would identify a trustworthy site ? Thats the thing I keep scratching my head about. I know one when I see one but I don't think I could come up with an algorythm for one.

Trusted sites

A couple of weeks ago there was a TW thread with a link to a paper by a couple of folks from, I believe, Yahoo and Stanford, in which they wanted to identify link spam sites basically using PR from "trusted sites."

(Can't find the danged thread now. Thought I bookmarked the paper as it had a few good nuggets in it but can't find that either. Word of the day: Organization.)

Anyway, to start off they defined trusted sites basically as and .gov domains, .edu & such with some qualifications. The also identified one -- only one -- high quality directory, that they didn't name.

Ahhh, found it:

Link Spam Detection Based on Mass
Estimation

Section 4.2

Yep that's the one.

Yep that's the one.

how to determine trust...

Without going to the published papers, one can surmise that numerous factors can be assumed to reflect trustworthiness. It would be reasonable to suspect a weighted combination of those would be included in a trust metric. Were I a Google engineer, I'd look at those factors across a sample of spammy sites and compare to a trusted sample. Surely certain factors would stand out.

We know age of links is considered worthy of throttling, therefore we might consider backlink churn to be reflective of trust quality. Think derivitive d/dt... sitewides are a high first derivitive... frequent changes to site wides hurts trust? Probably easy to test if you can sacrifice a trusted site :-(

We know theming is good, and we suspect theming works along some semantic layering or set theory. We know theming is analyzed with link checks (neighorhoods etc) so it is safe to assume set overlaps for backlinked pages (the degree to which backlinks are contextualy relevant, as reflected by the semantic set memberships of the pages involved) could be a factor in determining trustworthiness. A factor, with some weighting. This is easy to play with... just make some essentially dup content and add in a power word from a set considered related but which you had not previously included. You may have to insert it a few times... no need to make sense; just insert it at more than 10-16 word intervals (double the 5-8 word assumption for overlapping). Will it undo a dup check? Will it boost relevance? Or is it trust? No one knows, because things like that ride the edge of the algorithms judgement (and in a perfect world could be used to tease out the algo).

On that note, couldn't conversational meter be a measure of trust? Pretty easy for linguists to score text content on grammar and punctuation etc... to determine readability. Machine generated stuff would score miserably. Blogs would do well, as would reviews, especially the wordy ones the engines appear to prefer.

Since trust is a quality quality factor, quality itself (however metered) is a factor for trust rank. If it is known to be recursive, lower the weight but don't throw it out.

Age is certainly a factor in trust. Some have hinted that length of domain registration is a factor in trust, and age of a link is a factor in trust applied to the link.

Think about how you might meter trust and you get into just about all of the quality signals people have always talked about. It's the same, only different ;-) I believe that is why we see different behavor in different markets... in some less competitive markets trust isn't metered separately from quality, while in others it is. I also believe this sort of overlap in quality factors is responsible for some of the anomolies we see (a site ranks really well that shouldn't, or a good site tanks) because the overlapping factors are multiplied given their inclusion in both factors, which are then combined for a ranking score. Pure conjecture.

At some point humans are inserting judgement i.e. "turning the dials" on the algos because it is not possible to predict how trustworthy sites might vary from untrustworthy sites, using only a-priori knowledge. If those "ways" are inadvertently emphasized by the algo, the SERPs suck. SERP suck has to be tuned out carefully (over weeks, it seems!).

Boring and long post... without any wankers or wanking or even better, arse words.

Mostly we know...

Whatever algo google uses that puts your site in #1 is best.

Anything else is some 'cock knocker' shite.

Nick_W Interviews Wanker

You realise the headline could have been written that way round...

...wonder why Aaron wrote it other way round?

wonder why Aaron wrote it

wonder why Aaron wrote it other way round

Nick always uses the word wanker...and I love it...my use of the term was to pay homage :)

Comment viewing options

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