homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.227.40.166
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / Link Development
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: martinibuster

Link Development Forum

    
triangle links
is there any documented proof that this is better than recip
warthog




msg:409566
 10:19 pm on Jun 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have read a lot about triangle linksing - but I have yet to see any real proof or actual demonstration that this is any better than recipricol links.

has anyone read any real proof? can you point me to some research before i spend a lot of time looking into this?

gracias

 

toma




msg:409567
 12:11 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)

Engines will include filter for that in the algorithm soon enough.

Philosopher




msg:409568
 12:37 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)

The idea is that a triangle links looks to the engines as if both sites are receiving a one-way link instead reciprocal links.

If Site A links to Site B and Site B links to Site C instead of back to Site A, then in theory, both site B and Site C now have a one way link which is often thought of as having more impact these days than a reciprocal.

The problem is that for this to truly work, then site A and Site C cannot be seen as affiliated in any way. If Site A and Site C are completely separate (meaning no linking between Site A and Site C, hosted different places, different IPs etc.), then it can work. Otherwise, the engines can detect it pretty easily.

rytis




msg:409569
 1:08 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)

If engines wanted to detect triangle linking, they would look for significant number (or maybe just a trickle) of similar links from site A to any-site-X, that also contains link to site C.

Reciprocal links exist on the web in their majority for reasons other than SEO, while systematic triangle-linking can only be treated as plain SE gaming IMO.

webweasel




msg:409570
 12:42 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

Let me ask, if A links to B and C links to A; and C and B are on the same server, I've got a problem?

markbaa




msg:409571
 5:41 pm on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

No one knows for sure weasel, but the question I always ask is:

If you were google, do you think you would reward or punish that behaviour?

Me, I'd say punish. Doesn't mean they do, but means they might at some point.

cabowabo




msg:409572
 4:22 pm on Jul 2, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just another spammy methodology that will soon be crushed if it isn't already.

Cheers,

CaboWabo

webweasel




msg:409573
 5:06 pm on Jul 2, 2005 (gmt 0)

Per-chance I have not been clear in my earlier posting.

If a a site about Toledo Ohio restaurant "A" wishes to link to another site about Toledo Ohio gas stations "B" this is clearly relevant linking. The point of relevance being Toledo Ohio. Now if that Toledo Ohio gas station site "B" wants to link to Toledo Ohio Hotels "C-1" or a different Toledo Ohio restaurant "C-2" it should not fear that they have some how crossed the line into the badlands of a G--- penalty.

In fact It seems to me that - that is what good linking is all about - relevant links that might be if interest to your visitors and it seems only wise to avoid links to competing websites.

Robert Charlton




msg:409574
 6:16 am on Jul 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

If Site A links to Site B and Site B links to Site C instead of back to Site A, then in theory, both site B and Site C now have a one way link which is often thought of as having more impact these days than a reciprocal.

The problem is that for this to truly work, then site A and Site C cannot be seen as affiliated in any way. If Site A and Site C are completely separate (meaning no linking between Site A and Site C, hosted different places, different IPs etc.), then it can work. Otherwise, the engines can detect it pretty easily.

I think that if all, or even a large number, of Site C's inbounds can be traced back in one hop to Site A, you've got a problem.

neuron




msg:409575
 6:29 am on Jul 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

Well, what if I have 20 sites, and I offer a link from any of the 20 sites for a link to site 21? Will that be detected? How about 40? How many do I need?

econman




msg:409576
 7:42 pm on Jul 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

I don't think anyone knows how many sites it would take to make elaborate interlinking patterns "safe" and perhaps there is no number which assures a degree of safety.

From what I've read, the consensus appears to be that the SEs don't like nepotistic linking patterns (amongst affiliated sites, and/or sites owned by a small number of webmasters). The SEs are likely to view these patterns as "link spam" if the interlinks represent a substantial percentage of the total links into any given site, regardless of the actual motivation for the link patterns.

Provided the interlinks are a very small percentage of the total links going into any given site, you might be OK. If the interlinks represent more than some unknown fraction (perhaps 10%?), you run the risk of having all of the interlinked sites penalized for possibly being guilty of a "link spam" scheme.

Langers




msg:409577
 11:40 am on Jul 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have started looking into something similar to this. But instead of a triangle I am simply linking a -> x1 -> b where b is the most important site to me.

so it looks like:

a -> x1 -> b
a -> x2 -> b
a -> x2 -> b
a -> x2 -> b
a -> x2 -> b
a -> x2 -> b

Where the x sites are all on the same server and a and b are on unique servers.

I wonder if this would be counted as a spammy technique?

cabowabo




msg:409578
 6:03 am on Jul 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Yes it would, because of your intent. That was one of the major themes in New Orleans: intent.

Langers




msg:409579
 8:22 am on Jul 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Sorry, That should have been:

a -> x1 -> b
a -> x2 -> b
a -> x3 -> b
a -> x4 -> b
a -> x5 -> b
a -> x6 -> b

Langers




msg:409580
 8:23 am on Jul 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Surely any type of SEO is intent...

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / Link Development
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved