[Please note: Something happened with your MUA and your letter had fallen off 
the thread.]

Akira Urushibata <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 28 May 2020 Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
>> "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.
>
> Other conditions being equal, a websearch will rank a newer document above an 
> older one.  But the other conditions are never equal.

Yes-yes, sure.  My question was rather about those ‘alternatives’, mentioned by 
@[email protected], that treat dusty areas of the web better.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to