"Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> It is fairly well-known that Google ranks newer material above older 
> material.  Historic areas of the web are basically in a black hole as far as 
> the Google search is concerned.
>
> And since many people reach for the Google search engine without even 
> thinking there might be alternatives, those areas of the web basically don't 
> exist.

That is, there are some websearch providers that do not rank new and updated 
articles higher?  Why do not they, I wonder?  It looks like a pretty sane 
choice.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to