Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
A few slices short of a loaf.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                               

Google Minus Button

A 'minus' button for each listed result.
  (+63, -5)(+63, -5)(+63, -5)
(+63, -5)
  [vote for,
against]

Google, same as it is now, but with a little thing on each idea that denotes a negative aspect. The idea is that: You have a Google listing of results, and you're currently pecking through the list, only to find a result that is nothing like the desired objective. Clicking on this 'minus' button will not only remove this entry from your results list, but cleverly remove all others that might similarly have been included for similar reasons. It's just an additional way to sift and sort, but this time: within results; and without using words.
Ian Tindale, May 16 2005

Waxy.org links http://waxy.org/links/
Look for May 16, 2005 [waugsqueke, May 20 2005]

Search Engine Watch http://blog.searche.../blog/050923-132042
It doesn't work exactly as Ian describes, but certainly a step on the way there. [zen_tom, Sep 28 2005]

Matt Cutts' Blog http://www.mattcutt...blog/remove-result/
Interesting blog by Matt Cutts, Google SEO [zen_tom, Sep 28 2005]

AllTheWeb http://www.allthewe...g=crv&_sb_lang=pref
might do what you're saying. I haven't played with it for a while. Try searching for Bakery... It'll suggest other options which suit/don't suit [Dub, Oct 02 2005]

Report "spam" pages to google. http://www.google.c...act/spamreport.html
[jutta, May 11 2007]

Clusty, the clustering search engine. http://clusty.com/
Sorts results by tags, by source and by domain type. I tend to use this instead of google nowadays. [DrBob, Nov 27 2007]

[link]






       This would be similar to the Amazon music recommendations system (which used to be the FireFox music recommendations system). If it recommends something which you don't like, saying you don't like it will rebalance all the other recommendations. Applying this to search results would be nice though.
hippo, May 16 2005
  

       Much needed +
energy guy, May 16 2005
  

       Interesting.   

       It might be useful when used in a manner opposite to the stated goal. In the creative thinking/problem solving process you might filter out the "good stuff" and look for inspiration in the remaining orthogonally related references.
half, May 16 2005
  

       Perhaps if the "votes" (filter set) were applied only to your search result set. Guard that cookie!
bristolz, May 16 2005
  

       //Clicking on this 'minus' button will not only remove this entry from your results list, but cleverly remove all others that might similarly have been included for similar reasons// [Briz], does this scentence not protect the cookie?
daseva, May 16 2005
  

       Google already does something with the opposite information, i.e. clicking a link you did like. Look at a Google results page: on the <a href=> link that takes you to your result, there is also an "onmousedown" event defined that calls a small function to log which ones you clicked on.
krelnik, May 16 2005
  

       Maybe I'm missing something, but I read this as only applying to your search in progress, like the [similar pages] option after each result, but in reverse: [remove ones similar to this]. I like it, if that's what it is, but already it's pretty easy to remove a lot of wrong results by adding -(keyword).
oxen crossing, May 16 2005
  

       I do what [oxen] does (-keyword), and I suspect that would be far more precise than a button.
ldischler, May 19 2005
  

       True, but that only works if you know what you're doing. I'm becoming aware that although google is about as simple an interface as it can possibly be, it's still beyond a lot of ordinary people to create a useful search string beyond directly typing in the words in one block as they think about it. There's rarely any modification or optimisation to turn it into an effective search string.   

       Yes, to clarify, this only applies to (and within) your own results.
Ian Tindale, May 19 2005
  

       Waxy picked up on this link (see link about link) and pointed out that it's "badly needed, and would also provide aggregate stats to Google for removing spam."
waugsqueke, May 20 2005
  

       (mis-annos duly yanked. Apols to anyone who said something that I shouldn't have deleted - by all means say it again).
Ian Tindale, May 20 2005
  

       I've just noticed this feature pop up in my last few google results - so this idea would seem to be in the oven.   

       Having nosed around, it would seem to be in testing and is only available to people using the Personalised Search feature.
zen_tom, Sep 28 2005
  

       Bun! Google does sometimes have an option "More like this" (or something)... this'd be great. Sort of genetic search engine... Take a look at the link, too.
Dub, Sep 29 2005
  

       Aboot the Amazon/Fire Fox search engine thing, in order for Google to do such a thing, they would have to place all of the sites in to categories, then further break them down in to relations...   

       Too much work, since they have a LOT of info...
nahte123, Oct 02 2005
  

       They actually already do this (to some degree). You make a search, and it notes all the sites you looked at and immediately left and those that you passed over. Upon making the same searh another similar search(even days later), these results are shuffled to the very bottom (usually a number in the 100K's or so depending on the speciality)   

       They use some great algorithms for this. Somewhat baked?
SuiGenerisKitten, Nov 21 2005
  

       I was thinking that a scheme like this, along with registration of users to avoid unjustified attacks, would enable Google to eliminate the bogus content sites from its engines.
DrCurry, Mar 02 2006
  

       this is a nifty idea: but Google's search success lies in having a simple UI: improvements to it should ideally be invisible to the user. Perhaps you could modify the algorithm to factor in information about which links actually get clicked... that would be transparent, and might improve search results.
conskeptical, May 10 2007
  

       Good idea. Searching for a topic in different ways often keeps getting the same annoying irrelevant pages. Manually removing them and their associated pages would be very handy. I do wonder, though, doesn't Google push pages with lots of Google-ads first nowadays? Even if they're annoyingly irrelevant?
django, May 10 2007
  

       That would surprise me very much. Not ever selling placement in the real search results (as opposed to the "sponsored links") is a pretty important core principle of theirs, and people's trust in, as ask.com's ads call it, the "algorithm" is arguably their greatest asset - so if they broke with that, and you could prove your claim, that would be a pretty big deal. (And would piss a lot of people off.)
jutta, May 11 2007
  

       I've been tinkering with such an idea, by adaptively applying results through Bayesian Classifiers.
ironfroggy, May 11 2007
  

       A similar feature I would like would be an "other-than" notation, which would ask for instances of a word which occurred somewhere other than in a particular phrase, but which would not exclude all pages that happened to include that phrase.   

       For example: "(otherthan-Joe's)-Crab-Shack" would return pages containing "Fred's Crab Shack", even if they also contained references to Joe's, but would not return pages which didn't any reference any "Crab Shack" other than Joe's.
supercat, May 11 2007
  

       [supercat] just put a minus in front of the term you don't want. -joes +"crab shack" is what you want. Works fine.
Galbinus_Caeli, May 11 2007
  

       That does the job in practice, but it's not quite the same. Consider
A "Joe visited Fred's Crab Shack"
B "Joe visited Joe's Crab Shack"
C "Fred visited Joe's crab shack"
D "Fred visited Fred's Crab Shack"
E "Bob visited Joe's Crab Shack and Fred's Crab Shack"
  

       Supercat's expression matches A, D, and E because they have a Crab Shack other than Joe's.
Your query matches only D; A, B, C, and E all contain the word "joe", and -joe excludes them.
My own knee-jerk solution of -"Joe's Crab Shack" +"Crab Shack" matches A and D, but not E, because it happens to mention both Joe's and Fred's.
jutta, May 11 2007
  

       Well what you really need is a search engine that accepts regular expressions. //(^joe\'s) crab shack//
Galbinus_Caeli, May 11 2007
  

       Also, there should be an explanation of why it doesn't fit as well. However, every single search result is like this when you get to about the 3rd or 4th page.
quantum_flux, Nov 27 2007
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle