Originally Posted by PaperCutter
As far as SEO dying, I think the algo will become too smart to be easily gamed. If that means that the best results go to the pages with the best content, I'm ok with that.
Google's Algo always has it's crippled side, a sort of Achilles' heel.
I've got one page on my site that I think clearly shows where Google places great weight on a site like Wikipedia, even if the Wiki page does not merit top ranking.
Google this > "Hyperion Redwood"
Wikipedia .. although a definition site, is paper-thin on that one. My page is the anti-thesis for content about that particular tree. Wikipedia does not even have a photo for that redwood. And their page content is edited by more or less, completely anonymous people.
If content ruled, Wikipedia's page should always be subordinate to mine, on that particular subject.
Proposed solution !
Google's weakness is computers. The lack of their people doing real content check. My proposal, is a system where people like myself, you, whoever, willingly send them an electronic payment ... say $10 ... for a quick human look
at two URLs when I feel a quick 10 minute look can determine if they need to mark one page as better than another, manually. The expense is covered, and any risk would be to the person submitting.