本帖最後由 豬農 於 2013-10-20 10:10 編輯 0 z4 B! L- C( U
8 y$ Y: Z* z5 G6 V不知道這個話題有沒有已經討論過， Google+1 是否真的目前已經對排名有直接推高的影響，是值得研究一下。這個在樓主此帖 和 TGL 8月的另一貼都出現過了。（當然是國外翻譯來） / x% ], @, V5 W9 W# I c# h
% y# M) w/ ^: @8 G: j& u# F
對於 Google+1 目前是否已經對排名直接推高，Google的（發言人）Matt Cutts很快就出來跑到HackerNews上說，非也。他說! L+ J+ ^5 N0 e" T) R* t2 r
6 ^; r2 `1 b" {( L0 J# WJust trying to decide the politest way to debunk the idea that more Google +1s lead to higher Google web rankings.
他繼續說這些不是谷歌信號：( R( Y) s) H+ y& E9 S" K
3 V6 S) b: K& P7 C
If you make compelling content, people will link to it, like it, share it on Facebook, +1 it, etc. But that doesn't mean that Google is using those signals in our ranking.% z! ^& x; N2 o0 o+ u
7 m, r2 U" I) v8 C" I4 h4 [5 z: C5 D# }/ r
Rather than chasing +1s of content, your time is much better spent making great content.$ r. d* l% _6 L+ k0 ^
, j* [% j y' }, m' c( h& I+ g* jSuffice it to say that I would be very skeptical of anyone who claimed that more +1s led to a higher search ranking in Google's web results.0 W9 M& D& V; p
8 H3 [, H$ p3 X* T! wMost of the initial discussion on this thread seemed to take from the blog post the idea that more Google +1s led to higher web ranking. I wanted to preemptively tackle that perception.
+ [$ h' n& M* o, R順便說一下，以前Facebook Shares也被認為有類似的效果，同樣被Cutts否定。但是後來有人提出，有+1 並非是壞事，因為，既然你的東西受歡迎，鏈多鏈高質鏈自然，排名靠前，讀者多，自然也會有更多 +1，facebook shares 等 （correlation），谷歌的算法看上去更自然。但目前，其+1數量多少並非「直接」推高排名（causation)。關鍵是」直接「二字, 間接的效果很可能有(indirectly promote links, tweets and other signals)，這裡就不詳述了。
, r& f$ f4 G! @" D3 u, H
- O: m0 y( r4 Q: j9 d因此看來，對於+1 ，圖表所表示的僅僅是correlation，而非causation。
( v0 i; a! C# G8 M/ N( W
8 {& ?7 B+ J8 A4 ]$ B) S8 Z" r- |9 [; e6 |& X7 B& `3 a
2 N. s/ Q2 v5 g% F/ E2 ]/ s1 M
6 o# A8 G3 s4 ]4 E/ K9 v
3 f' W0 U* l- ?/ o* U( \/ I
|
發表於 2013-10-19 15:18:37
