Thanks, David!

Yes you're absolutely right [1] -- and that is of course why the generalized search engines are behind the times (insofar as they do One Size, Fits All rankings).

Like I said above: I am more interested in what other people would like to see (in economics, this is known as demand) than in simply putting my own ideas "out there" in a "take it or leave it" fashion (the so-called supply side).

But I do not wish to evade your question -- which I guess is your sincere interest in my personal viewpoint. I have quite often mentioned what I feel is a good way to rank things, but my views also change over time.

WRT http://Groups.CX I think the primary focus is (and ought to be) groups. This means: not one group focused on one thing (which might be more appropriate under http://Group.CX ), but rather the interaction of groups, and also (to use a regrettably overused term): the "metatagging" of groups. For example: if some neighborhood group project were listed on httü://neighborhood.groups.cx then that would mean that the group listed would have some of the qualities associated with being a neighborhood group -- perhaps even a "highly rated" and/or "top ranking" (or "widely acclaimed" or "recommended by experts" or whatever) neighborhood group -- these are the kinds of issues the management team could focus on (from my point of view).

What do you think?