Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 14:58 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 396055
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-17
That depends entirely on what you might mean by "quality".
Many people would turn the definition around on you ... in their minds "quality" content might well be defined as "the easiest readable story able to be found on Google".
This also depends. It may well actually mean that some sites which have severely overestimated their own importance in the public's mind could effectively disappear from public view, never to be heard from again.
kragill:
Precisely. Many people will just read whichever version of the story which is the first hit on Google.
Edited 2009-11-24 01:44 UTC