In searching for an understanding of how Google could make such a mistake as categorizing us as a “Content Farm.” I began with this: It’s called PageRank and it is a bot. With the hundreds of millions, possibly billions of sites Google has found necessary to classify in order to better serve their public with their search engine, we were classified as a Content Farm by a bot.
If we want to be reconsidered, we or Bendrew must appeal Google’s decision. Getting the attention of an actual Google human with decision-making capacity might take time, so we, as a community, have some thinking to do before we petition Google for reconsideration. This requires consensus. Consensus can be a difficult thing to arrive at on Fluther due to the nature of independence of thought in this community—the best reason in the world.
1. First thing is we must confirm that Google has actually classified us as a Content Farm from a valid Fluther authority.
2. What are the founder’s wishes? Maybe it is convenient for them that this site is low traffic right now as these are young men with families and careers. They may have just been generous all this time because they know the site is extremely important to many of the people who still populate it, but BenDrew rarely visits anymore, probably due to the business of life. They may not have the time to devote to a larger population. And they may not want the expense of an additional server or two, if it came to that. Or, they may wish that Fluther simply run it’s course and die a natural death. We must ask the founders if they wish us to appeal for a new classification.
3. Know this: once a Google human with this type of decision making capacity can actually be reached in order for us to petition for reclassification, we have no control over what our classification will be. Knowing humans as I do, they have probably been swamped with millions of appeals throughout the world since the last reclassification, many of which are fallacious. I can see where this is drudge work and not profitable to Google to give attention to.
4. I think the best way is to repeatedly petition Google with a document, an actual petition signed by as many Flutherites as are interested, describing what we believe Fluther to actually be. Reaching a consensus on the latter part of that sentence may be difficult. A question might be asked such as this, “How would you describe Fluther?” and data could be taken from the answers given.
5. The Petition: The first part should be a description taken from a consensus of what Fluther is to those people who took part in answering the above question and a section describing the demographics, traffic, active population which is found on sites that measure such things. The second part will be the signatures. The petition will reach Google in the form of a question in Fluther’s Meta section (I would prefer General because it would get more notice) such as: “Who would like to sign a petition asking Google to reclassify Fluther from a ‘Content Farm’ to something more appropriate?” The details would define “Content Farm,” the ramifications of being classified as a Content Farm, and the purpose of the petition. A link to the petition would then be sent out to every Google Admin contact address that can be found until there is a response. Repeatedly, if necessary.
6. Do we really want a sudden, large influx of people that will certainly change the nature and culture of this intimate community? Think about it. Think about both the benefits and the possible loss.
What we have here, for better or for worse, is a very unique, intimate community. We know each other. There may be some old animosities, as well as close friendships that have been forged. Just like any other community. It is small and there is very little real anonymity. We may not know each other’s physical addresses, but we know for the most part the likes and dislikes, their approximate age, sex, physical maladies, what meds are taken, political bent and concerns—just like any real small town. We are known for our low tolerance of LEET & flame, our civility, our silliness and our helpful, informative answers to each other when actually called upon. But we fear we are dying of natural attrition, assisted by a misclassification performed by a bot.
And we all know where to find more action, more conversation, higher rates of Q&A, and more frequent, deeper questions, less moderation, more argument, more sarcasm & snark, and more meanness. All that we find lacking at Fluther can be found elsewhere in profusion. Do we want to sacrifice some of our intimacy for a rapid increase in traffic? Many of us feel proprietary and protective of this site. This is natural and instinctive, even in the virtual world. A year after reconsideration, this site may be totally different than that which we know today. To many of us, it may seem like a foreign country with a new, superimposed culture all it’s own.
Or we could let things be.
Composing members:
0
Composing members:
0
