> > I disagree. Even preselecting threads would require knowledge and
> > experience most college kids just don't have.

> Who's talking about preselecting threads?  It doesn't take a genius to
> delete BS like Adam mentioned, and KEEP and ADDRESS other emails.
> Hell, simple filters can do most of that!  Certain phrases can be set
> to be automatically deleted.

> > I second Adam's  statement from my own experience,
> > Googlers do care about site owners.

> ????  If they CARED about site owners, they would:

> NOT be deleting UNIQUE WHITEHAT webpages AND entire websites from
> their index.....with absolutely NO EXPLANATION to the site owners.

> Using something as asinine, nefariously manipulated, and harmful as
> PR.

> There would be no "supplemental index".

> There would an EMAIL ADDRESS for contact like MSN, Y, Ask, et al have.

> There would not be class-action and independent lawsuits against them
> filed by victimized whitehat site owners.

> I could go on and on.  When these aforementioned things start to
> disappear, then I'll say they care about site owners!

> > That's not a new thing, I got email support from the Googleplex many
> > years ago, and their ongoing activities on our side of the fence prove
> > that they indeed care. Check jobs at Google and you'll find open
> > positions under "webmaster relations" like this one:http://www.google.com/support/jobs/bin/answer.py?answer=48264

> Talk is cheap.  ACTION speaks.

> > Talking with each and every Webmaster out there just doesn't scale.

> Once again, I cite the OTHER search engines.  If YAHOO can do it, if
> ASK can do it, if MSN can do it, SO CAN GOOGLE!

> >As for your weird theory that Webmasters made Google, please rethink
> > that.

> Let's see....G is a SEARCH ENGINE.  SE's INDEX websites to MAKE THEM
> BETTER at providing information to searchers.  SE's are supposed to
> provide a service to users so they can find the information at
> websites for which they seek.  NO WEBSITES = NO GOOGLE.  Ok, I've re-
> thought it.  Same thing.  The "weird theory" is that G would exist
> without websites!  They may exist, but NOT as a search engine!

> > Searchers made Google popular.

> The **MEDIA** made G popular.  They dominate the search market because
> their name is a household word, simply because they are mentioned in
> every TV newscast, TV shows, movies, etc.,.....all because of their
> "name".  Their name has become a verb because of this.  It's genius
> marketing because they had nothing to do with it.  They get billions
> of free advertising on these media outlets simply because of their
> name, which has snowballed.  The public has a short memory in these
> outlets.  If they hear a name enough, all is forgotten about the
> rest.  Also, the other SE's interfaces suck.  They are (either or
> all): cluttered with ads, too slow, and don't have the advanced search
> options G has.

> >Google gave us more trafic, and esp.
> > better targeted traffic, so it's more the other way round, Google made
> > a whole lot of Webmasters (rich).

> Sure, I totally agreee....IF YOU'RE INDEXED BY THEM!!   What about the
> millions of site owners with ALL of their UNIQUE RELEVANT pages
> indexed by the OTHER SE's, that are deleted in GOOGLE?  Ever think
> about those deserving people??  Apparently not.  There are OTHER site
> owners out there besides yourself that are in DEEP TROUBLE with G
> through NO WRONG DOING OF THEIR OWN.  Only a fool would deny that
> fact.  (I'm not yelling, just trying to place emphasis on phrases).
> Randy