Michael Rigby-Jones bookham.com> writes: > It's been happeneing for a while IMO. Either the Google spider is being more > selective about which bits of a > website it will keep, or more likely the increasingly commercial bias is > suppressing search results in > some way. I think that this is exactly what is happening. The 'optimizers' have determined by trial and error what makes good rankings and they are worsening the S/N ratio vs. sites which do not try to climb artificially. Either that or the 'linked to' metric has stopped being relevant. In any case, there seems to be a cutoff, like a cache size or similar, that prevents certain sites from appearing in listings at all if their rankings are low. Peter P. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist