I hadn't seen the backlash posts, thanks for pointing them out. I am always amused when those among the dominant group look around and say, "We're all equal here".

I also agree with your point about the A-Lister opinion. Whether it was because it has more worth or more visibility, hard to say. But patterns are hard to break.

It would be very nice if a new algorithm could solve all the problems of relavence in the blogosophere (and knock some of the self-congratualtory A-listers off their perches)

But until then, maybe what some of us need to do is to just get in the faces--literally--of those who are most linked...after all, charm can sometimes work just as effectively as a well-placed invective.

I sometimes think the current modes of search technology simply can't keep up with the needs and intentions of individuals.

Shelley - given the "worth" of some of the it's-all-merit opinions being echoed, I'm fairly sure it's "visibility" :-).

Tish - I don't think a new alogithm will necessarily solve problems - but it might be better than it was before, and that even a small increment is useful.

Seth-- thanks for playing the role of "gatekeeper" while I do real-world stuff like move. Caught up on Mary's, Shelley's posts. Also heard some other insider accounts out at OSCON last week.

Tish-- You may have come across a series I wrote that Seth has linked to a number of times-- The New Gatekeepers. I discuss some ways for technology to develop to mitigate some of the problems onset by competing for attention.

BTW, did you see this?

The Emergence of the Progressive Blogosphere
http://www.ndnpac.org/npi/blogreporthtml.html