OPINION V. FACT V. ATTITUDE AND THIS SITE

YES, I AGREE TO BE OPEN-MINDED; ENTER THE SITE

NO, I'M NOT OPEN-MIDED, TAKE ME STRAIGHT
TO THE PICTURES OF ADOLF HITLER

NEWS and THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS SITE, which may have eluded you.

HATE SYMBOL DISCLAIMER: We don't like displaying offensive hate symbols, but if we do not include the Google logo from time to time you might forget what evil ideologies we're targeting.

Become A Titleist: Check Out Our "Jill Hennessy Breasts" Experiment

SISSY NEWS: We find it difficult to believe that each of you agrees with everything we say here, since most of you are living-dead pro-Google gomers. If you'd like to leave a comment for us, rest assured we will treat you like we treated you in high school, not like we treat you here. (In high school we were nice to you when you called us stupid, because we thought your ignorance was something you'd grow out of.) fullmetaljackie choke_yourself (The other contributors wished to remain anonymous for some reason.)

PROCRASTINATIONEWS: We've been busy with [insert present season here] activities, so this site is pretty much still in the rough draft phase. We know you can tell. Besides, those of you who have some idea how difficult it is to communicate basic ideas and morals learned in the third grade to a population that thinks on a kindergarten level ... you know it's not always as easy as it seems. (Think "Dumb and Dumber": This site is dumb, you're dumber. Let us pray for your brain.)

NEWS: Google Image Search gives us a great big h*rd on. Much to our confusion—since this goes against everything we know about what Google The Search Engine considers important when ranking and indexing websites—Google Image Search seems to care more about content than whether a site is trendy or commercial, both when determining what to index and where to rank it. ("Content" here meaning pictures—I'm being specific because usually "content" refers to text). We've seen high-quality pictures from low-ranking (but good) sites—ours, not ours, whatever—rank highly in Google Image Search. In case this is your first time here, this is very, very good news, and we hope we're not in error calling this. We're sick of hearing ourselves bitch about Google's ranking methods, which often force penniless college cheerleaders and elderly ladies to sell their flesh and go on all-out linking campaigns.

WTF! Q: What if I were on a desert island and had to choose a search engine? A: Maybe you screwheads haven't been listening, but I've stated quite plainly it's generally my experience that Google indexes more pages—sometimes 20% more, sometimes 30%, sometimes 5%. (In all fairness, for certain searches Yahoo does index more.) Factor Google's index in with my knowing how to search and my having no problem with going through the top 400 results. You still don't know?? Google, numbnuts. Being anti Google-Culture (huh-huh) is like being anti Guns-in-the-hands-of-five-year-olds. Pushing Google on an uninformed population is like giving machine guns to little kids. I love motorcycles and Abrahms battle tanks and whales and huge Marshall amplifiers and sentences with twenty conjunctions and everything else that's annoying or loud or nasty but if there were a sub-culture of idiots who wanted these things in the hands of all Girl Scouts I'd be the first one to protest. Google in the hands of uninformed Joe Public guarantees the retardation of our society if you look at the long-term, "big" picture. Treat a library like a Yellow Pages and you're bound to fuck things up.

NEWS / A POINT: Everything Google The Search Engine emphasizes when ranking sites seems to be geared toward bigger, more popular commercial companies. Forget the websites themselves, and especially forget non-commercial websites that stand alone, i.e. independent sites. For example: Abraham Lincoln sites and sites for people as dead as he is need not be updated every three seconds. But if one has the only site for Trudy Fruity, a Candian actress who died happily of old age in 1967, this site will rank 300 if it's not updated regularly. Not to mention, Link Popularity ... and everything else covered in the main section of this happy website.

NEWS / A POINT: Many of our sites are suddenly beginning to rank well. Who cares? It doesn't change the fact that it may take someone with an independent site two friggin' years of insane ass-kissing to get it to rank where even Larry Page would agree it deserves to rank. It doesn't change the fact that

hearing people praise Goooooooogle because Goooooooogle is trendy or because they're too scared to think for themselves is as bad as hearing people talk about how their smelly newborns are superior to everyone else's little gag-monsters because Daddy went to Harvard. "Yay! He poopied his pants!" The universe knows you're ignorant and doesn't care; further demonstration is not required. Now choke yourself.

If we were looking at this situation through our own eyes, we'd quit while we were ahead. But we're not looking at things through our own eyes. This site is for those who presently find themselves in the shoes we were in back when we started: the Google-trodden, victims of the huge Google assmunching fest, victims of the worldwide "appeal to the Google bandwagon" fallacy, victims of a perversion of Stockholm Syndrome so grand that tears are running down my sad cheeks as I write this. Sniff.

POINT: Besides, with our sense of humor, this site would still exist even if we owned Google, because we hate it when people do what the masses tell them to do. Companies need to do what they can to make a buck and survive, but people don't have to be stupid and easy-going. Unless they wanna get laid. So the technical point of this site has been and still is that

certain methods Google The Search Engine employs make us cringe regardless of where our own sites rank and regardless of whether we think these methods are necessary sometimes when looking at the big picture, which we do, but such a small number of people seem to understand that being anti Google-Culture does not logically imply being 100% anti Google-The-Search-Engine. (For us it's about 90%. Ha.)

We've never said you're "bad" if you use Google. I stated here quite plainly that this is not an anti-Google site, except in the broad sense of being anti Google-Culture. I and those involved with this site think that "Google is a tool just like a pencil, a gun, or a banana peel. Sometimes this tool can be useful. This site is anti-Google shoved down our throats, pure and simple." My saying this earlier and now (as well as—on the other hand—our poking fun at Google in general) has nothing to do with any of our sites—some of which Google treats well, especially Google Image Search, some of which even those who love Google would agree were "misplaced" in Google's results. We just think people should know WHY they're seeing certain results and not other results—especially in cases where Google gives us enough good Top 10 results to appease us and the remaining good results are beyond #300, whereas in Yahoo or MSN all the good results are placed in the Top 50 but maybe the Top 10 aren't so great.

Results attained through Link Popularity ("LP"; Google) and those attained through Focus On Content ("FOC"; Yahoo, MSN) both have their purposes. I personally use all three engines nearly every time I search, though I usually have an idea ahead of time which engine will best suit each of my search's needs. I'm sorry, but usually what I'm searching for is best attainable using Yahoo and MSN; within my favorite topics, the best sites are not those Google normally ranks highly. However, since Google does—in my experience—index many more pages, when I'm searching for something very specific within these sites—for example, a specific quote from a Stanley Kubrick movie—often the only search engine that has the information I'm looking for indexed IS Google, and ranking is not an issue because there are only 10 or 15 results total. When ranking IS an issue, though, most of the time Yahoo and MSN provide the best results hands down; usually there are fifteen sites maximum for my topics, and Yahoo and MSN generally place all fifteen sites in the Top 50, barring any technical glitches. Google will normally place only "teh most trendiest" [sic] of these in the top 20 and all the rest beyond 100, more often beyond 200 or even 300. (Yes—I really do sort through all of these results.)

Our "philosophical" [choke] point has always been and still is:

Google The Search Engine is the perfect model of how society (or any other group of people, for that matter)—at its worst—encourages its members not to think for themselves and to be creative but to go with the grain, to do what everyone else does. Success in Google means politics, and politics means doing whatever you can to get people to like you. In society—and in web society—to offend the least number of dildos you must strip yourself of personality and character; or, if you're like me—devoid of these things—keep your mouth shut.

It doesn't bother us too much that Google lets politics (ass-kissing) play a part in ranking what the sane would all agree were "Sites Regarding [Whatever] Topic." If anything "bothers" us it's that Google considers politics (butt smooching) when deciding even what site or sites get within the top 300 (among all the spam) for a [whatever] topic, EVEN IF ONLY ONE SITE EXISTS FOR THAT TOPIC and the rest is commercial keyword-trap nonsense. We feel that Google's requiring a site's existence to be validated by people is potentially bad news for any site maintainer who doesn't kiss ass and play the game, since many humans are by nature spiteful, jealous, hateful, and they basically do not what is right but what makes them look good in the eyes of our "living-dead" society.

COUNTERPOINT: But who really cares about any of this? Wouldn't our time be better spent worrying about drunk driving or famine? We're making fun of ourselves as much as we are Google. Admitting this really takes the fun out of it—since the purpose of this site is entertainment for the Google-trodden, but since we know of only four people who have gotten our point, we feel it necessary to be clear.