Comments on: How rank is it?

By: Slow Download Speed = Lower Google Page Rank : Ft. Hard Knox

Slow Download Speed = Lower Google Page Rank : Ft. Hard Knox — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:38:52 +0000

[...] How rank is it? [...]

By: McGehee

McGehee — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:09:03 +0000

Well, I did a search on that phrase just to see where it was turning up, and I believe I clicked a Dustbury link. But LaGrange?

By: CGHill

CGHill — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 21:03:53 +0000

Somebody today was searching for “McGehee’s Overpriced Opinions.” IP resolves to LaGrange, Georgia.

By: Lynn

Lynn — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:29:14 +0000

I found it. I guess 5 is not bad. Better than expected, actually.

I’m sorry to say I do care. For some reason I can’t resist a competition that I cannot win.

By: McGehee

McGehee — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:24:35 +0000

I don’t know my page rank. How does one find that out anyway?

I had to search “Google Page Rank” on Google.

By: CGHill

CGHill — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:24:15 +0000

If you don't want to use the Google Toolbar — and believe me, you don't — you can look it up here. Last I looked, you'd crept up to a 5.

By: Lynn

Lynn — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:18:02 +0000

Page loading speed is now a factor in Google page rank? Yay! Far out! Bravo! Perhaps now people who have extremely slow loading sites will get rid of some of the crap that’s slowing them down. Or perhaps not. It seems to me if they really cared they would have done something already.

I don’t know my page rank. How does one find that out anyway?

By: CGHill

CGHill — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:54:58 +0000

Back in the 1990s there was a lot of blather about the Top 5% of the Web, and sites declared to be part of such were given some semi-nifty little GIF to display. (As the phrase goes, choosy Webmasters choose GIF.) I immediately obtained a graphic indicating the Bottom 95% of the Web, and kept it up for longer than necessary to make the point.

The New York Times rates a 9 for nytimes.com.

By: Charles Pergiel

Charles Pergiel — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 06:46:22 +0000

Some time ago (a year ago maybe?) I found I was in the top one million web sites. Since there are an infinite number of websites, I thought this was pretty cool. I just went and checked my page rank and it is 3. 3 what? 3 donuts? I don’t get it. Is that good? Bad? How can you tell? What if you were a ten? Does that mean you have the most important webpage on the entire internet? Or does it just mean you have one of the umpteen (zillion) most important web pages on the net? And how did I get a three anyway? As far as I know only two people have ever linked to me. So three is like two links plus one because I can spell Google. I looked at a couple of explanations, but they went on and on and on and never explained why anyone should care, other than to say my PR is bigger than your PR. Well, I don’t think they did. I got bored after a couple of paragraphs of geek speak. You only got a five? Something is not right. You rate a ten in my book.

By: CT

CT — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 00:47:08 +0000

Honestly can say I haven’t checked my blog’s PR in years, and have no plan to do so, like, ever.

By: Adam

Adam — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:34:38 +0000

On Sophistpundit, the rockstar posts where search is concerned remain the math posts I wrote like three years ago to study for a class I was taking. My theory has always been that they didn’t have a lot of competition…

By: McGehee

McGehee — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:30:28 +0000

I can prove Google Page Rank is meaningless: my defunct (for slightly less than two weeks, but it was 99% defunct long before that) blog is rated 5.