You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

21574789? ago

We hàve proved over and over over and over that no books were linked before trip code changed. They only linked after the fact. Tags are being used to fool people and you are not not helping by bringing this old slide back to life

21575032? ago

They were linked after the fact— that is, after Q posted with them. But still this does seem like an additional channel of information that may well be intended. These associations are likely being done deliberately so they could have been deliberately done by Q team. unless you’re suggesting that these associations are merely organic, and resulting from the inclusion of Q’s tripcode on sites discussing these particular books. Gaming the SEO extremely well implies knowledge of inner workings of the intentionally opaque PageRank algorithm.

21575204? ago

People selling books know how seo works.

21575331? ago

Yes, everyone knows generally what helps. Google makes it clear that their ranking algorithm is designed to reward “more relevant” results with a higher ranking, though they don’t publish the algorithm out of a desire to prevent gaming it.

How are these results getting associated with Q’s tripcode? Is it possible that some of these associations were intentionally created by Q team? Or are they merely the results of either people trying to sell books or else just the organic results of the tripcode being mentioned adjacent to discussions these books?

It may be the case that the Q team is able to optimize certain results for their tripcode. I can’t dismiss this possibility just because it might instead be someone else.

21575443? ago

If Q wanted me to read a book why wouldn't he just put it in a drop?

21575484? ago

Maybe it’s just suggested reading?