6 Responses to "popula8ion – the all recruiting Google Custom Search Engine"
  1. Looks good, except for the name and logo design. I’d be nervous if I were you about how close those are to Google’s. It would be one thing if your site was a parody then they could only sick about $10 billion worth of lawyers on you to intimidate you into changing to something less like them. But your site isn’t a parody so they’ll actually have a good trademark infringement argument to make.

    Take it from this fully recovered lawyer, get a new name and logo design before you go live so you don’t have to switch later.

  2. Shannon says:

    Does this mean that you don’t want to be a collaborator Steven? 😉

    You’re right of course. Google has mounted an aggressive campaign to claim any trademark related to -oogle – so I guess that Recruit Google will fall under that domain. I actually made the logo at a ‘Google Logo Generator site’ – guess the GOOGPolice haven’t taken them out yet.

    I was having a bit of fun with the name today and try to block today’s litigious society our of my thoughts. We really wanted to get the Search Engine up and running and have added quite a bit of content at this point – *hoping to get more if anyone wants to help collaborate*. Did you try it out? What did you think?

    While we have had a few really good laughs today over Recruoogle…We aren’t married to any names yet – we just don’t want it to be something boring like ‘Recruiting Search Engine’.

    Maybe we should have a contest before we give it its own URL. Any suggestions?

  3. Bob Brown says:

    Sorry – this looks like a total waste of to me.

  4. Bob Brown says:

    sorry – meant to say “looks like bollocks and I hope you didn’t spend much on it”.

  5. Shannon says:

    Hi Bob…the word bollocks makes me laugh. The Custom Search Engine (CSE) Tools are free from Google and extremely easy to set up – so no real waste of my time. It is just a utility and Google gives you the CSE code to insert into whatever page you want. It isn’t dependent on URLs or names etc – so any of that can be changed at the drop of a hat.

    In my opinion, having the tools to build an extremely easy to publish vertical search engine on the topic of your choice is very far from a waste of time. Thanks for your concern though!

    bullocks hee…hee…

  6. Shannon says:

    THE FOLLOWING IS FROM COMMENTS IN THIS CONVERSATION HAPPENING ON RECRUITING BLOGGERS:

    Comments:

    Mike doesn’t get it. We can search whatever the creator of the search engine has put into the database as opposed to searching on Google itself. Is that it? Is it the same as Recruiting Fly?

    Posted by: Recruiting Animal | October 27, 2006 at 06:27 AM

    I guess you could say that it is like Recruiting Fly, but I am not sure what the search on the back-end was like to set up and what technology CM used. In this case – Google has provided Free and very easy to use tools that let you build your own search engine using Google technology on a topic of your choice. It also lets people that you invite collaborate and add content to help build the search engine. It is like returning to the days of when sites were hand-picked for their quality.

    So for example – I can make sure that anything in my search engine that relates to ‘ERP’ is about ’employee referral programs’ and not enterprise resource planning.

    There are other search engines tools in the space that allow you to do this – Rollyo & Eurekster are two. RecruitingFly might be using one of them, but this is the first time that Google has offered up their tools.

    Google CSE allows publishers to customize which keywords describe the search content, and use Google’s search APIs to insert the results page into our blog.

    Google CSE can be hosted on Google’s servers (which is how this is right now in EXCELER8ion) or hosted in an iframe on a site. I can now invite the recruiting community to help me improve the search engine. That community can then tag and promote certain results.

    Make sense?

    Posted by: Shannon | October 27, 2006 at 07:49 AM

Comments are closed.