Correct comparison-gen spec: run concurrently, refresh-don't-prune (#21)
Charles challenged whether the earlier "authority first, near-zero new pages for 60 days, prune the dead" guidance matched the SEO corpus. It didn't — two parts had drifted to generic SEO caution:
Charles challenged whether the earlier "authority first, near-zero new pages for 60 days, prune the dead" guidance matched the SEO corpus. It didn't — two parts had drifted to generic SEO caution:
- Sequencing: experts (Jackie Chu via Cody) publish CONTINUOUSLY at a
controlled rate (50-200/mo) while building authority — they don't pause. Corrected: generation starts day one at ~50/mo concurrent with the authority engine; branded search licenses RAISING the rate, not STARTING. Added Jackie Chu's verbatim quotes.
- Pruning: NOT in the corpus. For a data-rich site, existing low-traffic
pages are surface area waiting for authority (Balfour: pages are inputs judged on potential), not spam. Corrected to REFRESH-don't-prune; pruning only for genuinely thin/no-data pages. Noted GDA passes the "real company" test the decimated affiliate sites failed, so it's not penalty-prone and shouldn't get affiliate-site caution.
The 5 quality gates + monitoring signals (branded search, ranking stability, AI-referral trend) stay — those were correctly grounded.
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>