"the hard part is getting the people who write the requirements to understand why they should care...." I would like to think they care, it may just be the case of being caught off guard. I have search marketing experience and I know that these vulnerabilities can be exploited if you can ignore ethics. Even though Google does not condone googlebombing the practice is still widespread. You may recall the case of the Daily Mail columnist Julie Moult<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/28/julie_moult_googlebomb/> . If you Google Julie Moult a site very critical of her is still NO.1. This is not exactly Googlebombing, but shows how search results can be influenced by individuals.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/9/11 Christopher Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> I'm currently trying to ensure that my current client > >> builds suitable safeguards into a similar feature they're > >> proposing to deliver. > > > > > > Well surely it can't take much; something like SELECT * FROM > > 'active_news_articles' where 'published_date' => date(today)-90days? > > > > > > (I know that's a horrible mangling of SQL syntax, but you get the idea :P > ) > > As far as safeguards go, it can't be that much more difficult at the > > simplest level to filter out the old stories. Nobody cares whether a > really > > old story is popular or not... because it's old. ;) > > I'm sure the technical implementation will end up looking very much > like that. The hard part is getting the people who write the > requirements to understand why they should care.... > > Peter > -- > Peter Bowyer > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > -- Sam Mbale Mpelembe Network http://www.mpelembe.net Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe
