PDA

View Full Version : google bombs?




theantirobot
08-01-2007, 12:21 AM
What are your thoughts on google bombing other candidates? I bet we are strong enough to do it. Should we?

I was just thinking, maybe we could google bomb Fred Thompson to get the Fred Thompson Forums as the first result. That would be hilarious.

Obama returning Ron Paul would be nice... but maybe that is too much?

What do you all think?

foofighter20x
08-01-2007, 12:32 AM
not recommended.

google will just catch on and shut them down.

bygone
08-01-2007, 12:37 AM
I wouldn't bet on outsmarting Google today.

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 12:46 AM
I think we could outsmart google on the Fred Thompson Forums one. It would be so subtle.

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 12:54 AM
right now it's on page 16 of a Fred Thompson search. How would google catch on? Surely we can devise a way which it won't. People clicking directly on it multiple times probably looks fishy, but a slow continued assault on it could prove effective. Let's say we get a few hundred people to do it once a day for a month? would they notice? Would it have an effect?

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 12:59 AM
Marissa Mayer, Director of Consumer Web Products for Google, wrote on the official Google Blog in September 2005:[11]

We don't condone the practice of Google bombing, or any other action that seeks to affect the integrity of our search results, but we're also reluctant to alter our results by hand in order to prevent such items from showing up. Pranks like this may be distracting to some, but they don't affect the overall quality of our search service, whose objectivity, as always, remains the core of our mission.

On January 25th, 2007 Google announced on its official Google Webmaster Central blog that they now have "an algorithm that minimizes the impact of many Googlebombs [sic]."[12] The algorithm change had an immediate effect, dropping the well-known "miserable failure" link to the White House off the front page. Instead, the page contained mainly pages which discuss the miserable failure bomb.[13]. A related Google bomb was the No.1 ranking held by Tony Blair's website for the term "liar". As of May 2, 2007, the bomb had disappeared both from Google and Yahoo, but not from the UK version of MSN. Google bombs in which the target page actually contains the search word(s) were not affected.

Take note of that last line.

freelance
08-01-2007, 06:32 AM
>>What are your thoughts on google bombing other candidates?

Google worked on their algorithm to try to ferret out google bombs.

Try Googling "miserable failure." The results have changed:

http://www.google.com/search?q=miserable%20failure&sourceid=groowe&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

CasualApathy
08-01-2007, 08:33 AM
What is the point of google-bombing candidates???

Slugg
08-01-2007, 08:35 AM
I tend to think Google is in prime position to be an ally, I wouldn't want to upset them. Just my opinion though.

Ron Paul Fan
08-01-2007, 08:38 AM
What is the point of google-bombing candidates???

To bring their many skeletons and flip flopping examples to the first page of the searches for the candidates. Personally, I don't believe in any kind of bombing as I follow the founding father's and Ron Paul's position of non-intervention. Intervention doesn't lend itself to world peace.

Keith
08-01-2007, 09:54 AM
I tend to think Google is in prime position to be an ally, I wouldn't want to upset them. Just my opinion though.

I think this is the right answer.

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 11:25 AM
Google wants to be objective. They don't change their algorithm to effect specific searches. It was changed to reduce link bombing. The miserable failure bomb was eliminated. However, the new algorithm is only effective if the link being bombed does not include the search term. One time the white house added the word failure to their page, and it came right back to the top.

http://digg.com/politics/George_W_Bush_Failure_Again_Says_Google

Birdlady
08-01-2007, 11:33 AM
I think the fred thompson forum is a disgrace and I think anyone who partakes in that forum needs some time away from their computer. Help in your town, quit with the worthless online stuff.

If one of the candidates supporters decided to make a ron paul forum and trashed it, all of you would go mad crazy. :rolleyes:

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

foofighter20x
08-01-2007, 11:37 AM
I think the fred thompson forum is a disgrace and I think anyone who partakes in that forum needs some time away from their computer. Help in your town, quit with the worthless online stuff.

If one of the candidates supporters decided to make a ron paul forum and trashed it, all of you would go mad crazy. :rolleyes:

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

Maybe their mom and dad doesn't let them go outside :p j/k

Ron Paul Fan
08-01-2007, 11:40 AM
I think the fred thompson forum is a disgrace and I think anyone who partakes in that forum needs some time away from their computer. Help in your town, quit with the worthless online stuff.

If one of the candidates decided to make a ron paul forum and trashed it, all of you would go mad crazy. :rolleyes:

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

I'm standing up right now and applauding you. I've been advocating that we follow Ron Paul's message of non-intervention, but recently some people want to drop bombs on google and invade other forums to spam them. If they come and attack us here they will have good reason because we are over there. We should promote this forum by setting good standards, motivating people, and have them want to emulate us, but you can't enforce our goodness with an armed force like the neo-cons preach. It doesn't work and we have to admit it.

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 11:42 AM
Hah! that's funny! Nobody really supports Fred Thompson. The media just tells us they do. When someone gets online and finds the forums, they will inevidably end up supporting Ron Paul. Look on the forum, it's all paul supporters, and it will always be. There are too many of us. Fred Thompson is Ron Paul's main competition right now among people who don't know.

I've had enough of the msm's propoganda war on us. It's time we fight back.

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 11:49 AM
I'm standing up right now and applauding you. I've been advocating that we follow Ron Paul's message of non-intervention, but recently some people want to drop bombs on google and invade other forums to spam them. If they come and attack us here they will have good reason because we are over there. We should promote this forum by setting good standards, motivating people, and have them want to emulate us, but you can't enforce our goodness with an armed force like the neo-cons preach. It doesn't work and we have to admit it.


I have no problem starting arguments I can win. Fred Thompson has no substance, and I see nothing wrong with being in people's face about it. And it's clear to me that FredThompsonForum was setup as a place for Ron Paul supporters to convert those looking into Thompson. Look at the other candidates section. Look how the other candidates are described and look at how Ron Paul is.

There is no reason why we shouldn't utilize this tool for good. I can empathize with your hesitation, because currently the forum has a substantial amount of less than wholesome posts. However, we can change that rather quickly. We can make it a place that sparks interest in Ron Paul.

theantirobot
08-01-2007, 11:57 AM
To bring their many skeletons and flip flopping examples to the first page of the searches for the candidates. Personally, I don't believe in any kind of bombing as I follow the founding father's and Ron Paul's position of non-intervention. Intervention doesn't lend itself to world peace.

There is nothing wrong with fighting a war if the cause is great and you can win it. We should fight these information wars. We should fight to control the flow of information. That is what our enemies are doing. That is how they have shaped this nation in to the abomination it is today. Our army is much much bigger then theirs and we have truth on our side. We will win! Let us fight!

Ron Paul Fan
08-01-2007, 12:01 PM
There is nothing wrong with fighting a war if the cause is great and you can win it. We should fight these information wars. We should fight to control the flow of information. That is what our enemies are doing. That is how they have shaped this nation in to the abomination it is today. Our army is much much bigger then theirs and we have truth on our side. We will win! Let us fight!

I wholeheartedly disagree and my position is one that traces all the way back to the founding fathers. I remember something about blessed are the peacemakers unless I have been reading a different bible. I think we should start practicing what we preach and not invade other forums and start wars. I believe the CIA is correct when it teaches us about blowback and our interventionalist policies usually backfire. We should be focusing on making this forum better and spending our resources on things that are needed here.

jnpg
08-01-2007, 12:30 PM
Has anyone ever been killed by a google bomb? Can you get radiation poisoning from it or anything like that? Anyone concerned about ' blowback'?:p

nexalacer
08-01-2007, 12:46 PM
Ron Paul Fan.... I <3 you!:p

smtwngrl
08-01-2007, 01:01 PM
I think it's a lousy idea---as well as a huge waste of time and energy. I agree with others who said we should use non-invervention. Is this what we want others to do with Ron Paul's search results? And is this the type of nonsense we want Ron Paul's supporters to be associated with---because mark my words, it will come out.

But even more important, if we are focused on negative things, we won't be focused on positive things--namely, the positive things we need to do to help Ron Paul get elected.

smtwngrl
08-01-2007, 01:06 PM
And by the way, might I point out that theantirobot has only 12 posts to his name, and 8 are on this thread?

Ron Paul Fan
08-01-2007, 01:07 PM
What ever happened to talking with people, trading with people, being friends with people? Instead of bombing and invasions we should be spreading peace. The peace position is a winning position. And judging from the last two responses, the tide is turning. Welcome to the revolution.