You must login or register!
Inbound.org uses Twitter to register and create accounts. Your Twitter handle will also be your username here on Inbound and registration/login will enable you to submit content, post comments and create/edit your Inbound profile. Use the button below to verify your Twitter account.
Login or Register
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Google explicitly say that it was not preferencing Google+ results in the index? Therefore, doesn't this mean that they were?
Hey! Not cool pointing out logical falacies John... :-) If only journalists would step up to the plate and deliver that analysis/critique (as Danny Sullivan often does), I think the 4th estate would be a more powerful influencer of good action.
Haha sorry to be so logical about it, instead of just ranting about how unfair Google is :-) I agree. Journalists need to step up and think about this stuff. This is one reason why I greatly respect Danny Sullivan as a journalist, because he takes the time to think about this sort of thing. I really hope he writes a post on SEL about it.
First they removed "people and pages" over night, now this. I'd feel cheated as a business person who has invested time and money in a Google+ page hoping for some better placement on Google beacuse there was no other major reason to join Google+. So now that Google lured many business they change their mind? No, this is a classic bait and switch. Luckily I didn't waste my time on creating a Google+ page and also waited long enough to advise my clients on doing this. Early adopting Google's products is a high risk investment.
I invested a considerable amount of time on Google+ but I don't think it was a waste.
Well, we did for the community as well but most business people do not have the time and money so they mainly used Google+ to promote their work.