Comments on: Technorati Drops Content Older Than 6 Months Old

By: » Technorati’s total funding revealed - $21.6 to date in 3 rounds Web 2.0 Money: The Money & Business Behind the Web 2.0 Innovations

Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:24:11 +0000

[…] http://www.niallkennedy.com/bl.....share.html http://www.techcrunch.com/2007.....onths-old/ http://www.techcrunch.com/2006.....-comscore/ […]

By: Supremus

Supremus — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:51:25 +0000

Both Google BlogSearch and Technorati have a lot of Spam. Technorati has lost relevance today imo.

I think its time for a “social” wiki style blog search engine. I dunno why it has not been done yet.

By: blog-thing : Best of Feeds - 19 links - blogging, tips, google, opensocial, community

Sat, 24 Nov 2007 19:17:16 +0000

[…] [TECHNORATI] Technorati Drops Content Older Than 6 Months Old […]

By: Is Technorati Even Relevant Anymore? — BloggingNotes.net

Is Technorati Even Relevant Anymore? — BloggingNotes.net — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 15:49:30 +0000

[…] Technorati Dumps on Small Minded Bloggers after finding out recently that Technorati is going to dump posts that are more than six months old. So anything that I wrote between January and May of this year is no longer being indexed by […]

By: Best of Feeds - 19 links - blogging, tips, google, opensocial, community « // Internet Duct Tape

Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:21:43 +0000

[…] [TECHNORATI] Technorati Drops Content Older Than 6 Months Old […]

By: Noah Slater

Noah Slater — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:40:26 +0000

You are using “sic” wrong. Instead of this:

The emphasis in the quote is mine but it’s the key line: “most people don’t [sic] notice.”

You should have put:

The emphasis in the quote is mine but it’s the key line: “most people [REPLACEMENT] notice.”

Using “sic” implies the original quote was in error, which it wasn’t.

However, all of this presumes that a you needed to replace “don’t” with “didn’t” which you don’t because it’s correct in the both original and quoted context.

By: David Mackey

David Mackey — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 21:32:04 +0000

Of all the areas to look for economization, it doesn’t seem to be that indexes should be one. How much space can possibly be consumed by textual data? I mean, reams and reams of data can be contained in a relatively small space and using data compression techniques this can become even more miniscule. What about offloading to a lower storage tier? e.g. SATA.

By: Rollo

Rollo — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:59:07 +0000

Jorge: I stand corrected. Never thought I’d learn a word dating from 1612 on this blog.

By: Thilo

Thilo — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:07:39 +0000

At the moment Technoratie is really struggeling. I hope they will come back to where they have been, I think they are really usefull.

By: Athloi

Athloi — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 23:33:35 +0000

If blogs want to be taken more seriously, a searchable archive that can used to build up a peer-review trail on any topic might be really helpful! I hope Technorati figures it out and reverses this destructive, pointless course they (and Pete Doherty) are on.

By: Otis Gospodnetic

Otis Gospodnetic — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:13:42 +0000

@Duncan - do *you* *really* *ever* search for a blog (post) more than 6 months old, via Technorati or via GBS?

By: Technorati Deletes Index, Hopes Customers Won’t Notice| Zoli’s Blog

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 18:55:02 +0000

[…] Any hopes of users not noticing are up in smoke: it’s on TechCrunch, TechMeme and a bunch of blogs including hyku | blog, TeleRead, Susan Mernit’s Blog, Deep […]

By: max

max — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 17:31:33 +0000

Is this Duncan guy a 12 year-old? Or is he just Arrington’s toady? Cuz his critique of Technorati betrays his utter ignorance about Technorati’s core promise: what’s happening right NOW.

granted, i COULD scroll back more than 6 months worth of posts at Techcrunch, but then I’d just have more than 6 months worth of this guy’s stupidity!

do some research junior.

By: Support this story on Stirrdup

Support this story on Stirrdup — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:50:59 +0000

Technorati Drops Content Older Than 6 Months Old…

This story has been submitted to Stirrdup. Your support can help it become hot….

By: Jorge Barrios

Jorge Barrios — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:44:32 +0000

Rollo,

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/recency

By: I Am Not Posting To Spam My Blog

I Am Not Posting To Spam My Blog — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:06:29 +0000

Duncan,

I’m not saying it’s derivative. I’m saying it looks rubbish. The image would have served its purpose without trying to insert the company logo (I would hope most of us are intelligent enough to get the joke and not fill up the comments with “duh why is there a picture of a tractor?”), and the black text on part-dark-part-light background and obvious cut-and-paste job wouldn’t have distracted attention from the picture, which is otherwise funny and well placed.

By: Howard Owens

Howard Owens — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 13:35:53 +0000

I’ve only ever used Technorati for one thing and one thing only — to find the MOST RECENT posts either linked to my blog or on a particular subject.

To me that is the CORE functionality of Technorati.

Google blog search doesn’t do that as well because it is FILLED with SPAM. Though is does find some stuff Technorati misses.

Where Technorati has made a mistake is getting away from natural search for SUBJECT search and gone to reliance on tags, at least for one of my commonly used search terms.

That has driven me more to blogpulse.

But, frankly, I don’t get the “blog search” is Technorati core functionality assertion. I’ve never seen it that way, and I’ve been using Technorati almost from the beginning.

By: David Dalka - Creating Revenue and Retention - Chicago GSB MBA

David Dalka - Creating Revenue and Retention - Chicago GSB MBA — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:54:51 +0000

Death of Blog Search Part 3 - Technorati Cuts Data…

You’ve seen me talk about this before. Now the new CEO not only hasn’t fixed the Typepad duplicate counting problems, there are dozens of links that aren’t being counted. It’s cutting it’s most valuable asset. Historical d…

By: Duncan Riley

Duncan Riley — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:08:19 +0000

23
why is it every time I do an image I’ve been doing in that format for the better part of 5 years on blogs does some one like you come along and suggest that its got something to do with Uncov? Sure, Uncov will probably like this post but get the memo that Uncov isn’t original nor do they own the rights to funny graphics or lolcat pics! The image for the record is suppose to signify the wheels falling off from Technorati, and it was Photoshop thank you

By: I Am Not Posting To Spam My Blog

I Am Not Posting To Spam My Blog — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:50:12 +0000

What’s with the awful picture? Was the Technorati logo inserted with MS Paint? Uncov.net are probably not shaking in their boots. Oh, and the use of the present tense - which was throughout the paragraph, not just in the sentence you sicced up on - is perfectly correct if the situation is continuing.

By: Rollo

Rollo — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 09:33:56 +0000

As Duncan invents new uses for “sic”, the Technorati guy has invented a whole new word without anyone noticing: “recency” [sic].

By: Joining Dots

Joining Dots — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 09:01:10 +0000

Well I had Technorati search on my blog for looking up older blog posts. My most popular one is 2 years old now (http://www.joiningdots.net/blog/2005/10/what-does-web-20-mean.html) and continues to get referenced all over the web. I’ll be switching back to Google. Technorati has no relevance any more…

By: Duncan Riley

Duncan Riley — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 07:07:01 +0000

Dunkin
it was used in the context of Zoli asking the question with the response being in the past tense, not future tense. Most people don’t notice doesn’t make sense: it presumes that people wont notice in the future, where as Zoli had already noticed, dictating an appropriate response in the past tense.

As for the whole sic debate, I’m sick of it already, lesson learned and wont be repeated again

By: Marc Fiszman

Marc Fiszman — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 07:01:54 +0000

“…using Google BlogSearch [sic]”

The last line is also very awkward. I’d like to be [sic] all over it.

By: Anita Cohen-Williams

Anita Cohen-Williams — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 06:48:32 +0000

As a cybrarian, I must disagree. What will happen to all those students of Web 2.0 who want to research a specific event or time and what the blogs said about it? Not keeping older data is very shortsighted of Technorati.