homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.254.108
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / Link Development
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: martinibuster

Link Development Forum

    
Adding rel=nofollow to turn recips into one ways
fatpeter




msg:416310
 8:04 pm on Mar 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

I have a situation where I am receiving a couple of links a day and at the moment I am providing a normal href link back. Basically the people are paying for a listing and there is an additional condition that they link to me. The people linking to me don't know or care about my link back. They are paying for the targeted visitors I send to them. Is there any advantage for me to use the rel=nofollow tag. Does that make it a 1 way link in googles eyes from them to me or does google still recognise it as a reciprocal but just without passing pr? Is there another way I should handle this without using nofollow?

Any suggestions or tips appreciated

 

ogletree




msg:416311
 8:31 pm on Mar 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

Using it will protect you from being accused of selling links for their value in the ranking process.

ConnieS




msg:416312
 8:35 pm on Mar 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

If the sites are worth linking to why would you want to use the nofollow attribute?

fatpeter




msg:416313
 9:07 pm on Mar 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

My point is that from my understanding 1 way links to my site would have a higher value than reciprocal links. I don't really consider it selling links. I have a site which provides a service which people pay for, I give a link to their site as part of that service. I don't consider that they are paying me for the link. It would not be worth much from a seo perspective. I don't have any objection to linking to them....I am simply trying to work out if i can benefit my site by linking to them in a better way than a straight reciprocal link.

fatpeter




msg:416314
 9:11 pm on Mar 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

I should also add that their links to me generally bring me traffic too. They aren't links on link pages and are very visible. I insist on it.

JuniorOptimizer




msg:416315
 10:40 am on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

Be a sport and give them a link that counts.

martinibuster




msg:416316
 11:03 am on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

Does that make it a 1 way link in googles eyes from them to me or does google still recognise it as a reciprocal but just without passing pr?

That last part is interesting because it speaks to the heart of the potential abuse of the nofollow tag. You would think that the search engines would have something in place to deal with nofollow abuse. So you ask...

If Brian Boitano was a search engineer... What would Brian Boitano do?

Wouldn't it be interesting if the search engines identified it as a reciprocal and awarded a reciprocal link score (+/- or whatever) to the Linking Page, while simultaneously not awarding a benefit to the receiving party?

OR, how about...
In the case of a reciprocal link, the nofollow tag is ignored?

AND, how about...
If the search engines aren't doing that, maybe they should?

I'm just speculating, that's all. Good question.

fatpeter




msg:416317
 11:41 am on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

"Be a sport and give them a link that counts"

That isn't really the point. My link to them does count as they receive a service I provide and visitors expecting to find that service on their site. Of course my priority is to improve the ranking of my site as much as possible and I am looking for the best method of implementing these return links.

Martinibuster....

Good points and of course no one excpt google knows the answer. I certainly don't want to do anything that could be seen as negative as I already rank nicely but there is always room for improvement. Should I just be thinking of doing some kind of javascript link that can't be followed?

Again the point being these people I link to really don't care how the link is formatted...they just want the service i provide plus the visitors that use that service on their sites.

JuniorOptimizer




msg:416318
 12:06 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

Nofollow means 'this is an untrusted link'.

mister charlie




msg:416319
 2:12 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

Nofollow means 'this is an untrusted link'.

nofollow means "I am unwilling to vouch for the trustworthiness of this link"

SincerelySandy




msg:416320
 3:13 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

I should also add that their links to me generally bring me traffic too. They aren't links on link pages and are very visible. I insist on it.
So then, would it be okay with you if these people put a nofollow tag on their link to you? As you said, they are sending you traffic.
On one of my sites I use the nofollow tag, I also state very clearly in a few different places that paid advertisers will have a nofollow tag attached to their link. This way people know exactly what they are getting and can make an informed decision.
People generally expect that when they purchase a link that is not an ROS link, that they will be getting some benifit from it other than traffic. So if you're not going to give them a straight link that passes value beyond traffic, then consider making that clear on your site.

ogletree




msg:416321
 4:07 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

Matt Cutts has also said that if you sell links that you should put this on it.

sugarrae




msg:416322
 4:14 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

>>>I certainly don't want to do anything that could be seen as negative as I already rank nicely but there is always room for improvement.

Then I wouldn't be debating the different ways to fool Google into thinking these are one way links. Because that is essentially what you would like to do. Am I saying fooling Google is wrong... no - but you may not want to do it with a well established, well ranking site you care about.

>>>Should I just be thinking of doing some kind of javascript link that can't be followed?

That's most definitely how I would do it.

>>>The people linking to me don't know or care about my link back.

That's a big assumption. Don't be surprised if one or two install a "tracking system" after they realize what you're doing to return the favor.

My honest opinion is that if this site is ranking well and the relationships with these other sites make sense, then go get some *new* inbound links to improve your ranks - not manipulate Google with the old ones.

fatpeter




msg:416323
 6:12 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

"So then, would it be okay with you if these people put a nofollow tag on their link to you?"

To be honest that would not be o.k but then I am the one who dictates the terms. I am providing an enhancement to their website which others charge a lot of money for...sometimes on an ongoing basis. The yearly fee I charge is small (a setup fee to pay for my time in setting up my service for their individual site) as I am trying to get a good takeup on what I offer. Of course I want to get as much out of it as possible.

"That's a big assumption. Don't be surprised if one or two install a "tracking system" after they realize what you're doing to return the favor."

I am not talking link exchange and people getting upset that they don't get any benefit from my link. They are not paying me for a link... that just comes with the territory.

"My honest opinion is that if this site is ranking well and the relationships with these other sites make sense, then go get some *new* inbound links to improve your ranks - not manipulate Google with the old ones. "

These are new links, every week I get several uptakes which result in several new links to my site.

Well....now from all your answers I am leaning towards maybe linking to them in javascript.

julinho




msg:416324
 8:01 pm on Apr 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

I think the reason why Google may devalue reciprocals is because they are less natural than one way links.

To me, a reciprocal where one of the links has "nofollow" seems even less natural than a pure reciprocal.

wingslevel




msg:416325
 1:00 pm on Apr 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

further on martinibuster's point, i think google should count all links - even no-follow and javascripts etc. - they are still votes - technically it would be easy as the spider would just wait for the link to resolve and then credit the ultimate page with the link (and the pr)

Kufu




msg:416326
 9:09 pm on Apr 3, 2006 (gmt 0)

I think the reason why Google may devalue reciprocals is because they are less natural than one way links.

It is not a question of 'may devalue'; Google does devalue reciprocals, since they are rarely naturally occurring.

pageoneresults




msg:416327
 9:19 pm on Apr 3, 2006 (gmt 0)

Matt Cutts has also said that if you sell links that you should put this on it.

I saw that comment on Matt's Blog and thought to myself "Matt is asking the link brokers to identify their networks".

Personally, I wouldn't go near the nofollow attribute with a 10 foot pole. It was meant to prevent comment spam. Since the inception of the tag, many have taken it much further than it was intended to be used for.

If you want to flag your network of link partners, go ahead and start using the nofollow link. If you have to question whether or not a link to a viable resource is not to be trusted, then don't link.

This whole nofollow issue is a mess. It's turned into a SEO manipulation thing and I'd be willing to bet that 75% of the nofollow implementations are not correct usage, not based on the original plan for the nofollow attribute.

Want to send Google a clear message that you are involved in the whole link thing from an SEO standpoint? Start using the nofollow attribute!

JuniorOptimizer




msg:416328
 10:13 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

I'd rather that page was on the Google Webmasters Guideline page, rather than Cutt's blog. I bet a few million people will miss it being there.

Your customers and comment spammers aren't really the same thing.

ownerrim




msg:416329
 9:37 am on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

"'nofollow means "I am unwilling to vouch for the trustworthiness of this link'"

nofollow also means (to me, at least) "while I find it at this point in time worthwhile to list this link (for whatever reason), I have no clue as to who will own this page location in the future, what its future content may be, and whether or not it will be part of a good or bad neighborhood. Therefore, I choose to cover my a%^ in the here and now."

Rick42




msg:416330
 3:08 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

'nofollow means "I am unwilling to vouch for the trustworthiness of this link'"

nofollow also means (to me, at least) "while I find it at this point in time worthwhile to list this link (for whatever reason), I have no clue as to who will own this page location in the future, what its future content may be, and whether or not it will be part of a good or bad neighborhood. Therefore, I choose to cover my a%^ in the here and now."

maybe but it also screams (imho) "I am using this tag for obvious SEO purposes", which in itself is a statement that your links are there for other reasons then offering quality resources to you site's visitors.

Honestly..... don't bother. If YOU think its not safe to link it, or have doubts, why link to it in the first place?Again......DON'T BOTHER.

I don't see why webmasters or SEOs should bother with such petty techniques.

ownerrim




msg:416331
 6:17 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

maybe but it also screams (imho) "I am using this tag for obvious SEO purposes"

Or maybe it doesn't. Maybe it just says that:

1. It's becoming more frequent that legitimate domains are being abandoned by their former owners and are getting bought up by adult web operators.

2. it's a little difficult to trust some sites that carry ypn ads or adsense. you never know when they'll slide down the slippery slope.

So, to reiterate, while a page may seem worthy of being linked to today, there's no way to know if it will be part of a good or bad neighborhood six months from now. Sad, but damned true.

I don't worry about using nofollow on links to CNN, BBC news, most .edu and .gov sites. The rest? I wouldn't bet either way.

"If YOU think its not safe to link it, or have doubts, why link to it in the first place?Again......DON'T BOTHER."

Because, the information may seem worthwhile and beneficial, but there's simply no way to forecast the future intentions of most webmasters. With solid sites like the ones I mentioned above, I don't mind casting a "democratic vote", as google puts it. But most others--- Hey, for all you know, the site you're linking to may be a stolen copycat clone that's being operated by some adsense crook. Looks are deceiving and intentions are impossible to know. Likewise the future.

And I think this gets to the heart of what Cutts has been saying: only cast the vote if you're sure. But...even if you don't feel comfortable casting the vote, you can still provide the link for the benefit of your users.

bwnbwn




msg:416332
 1:58 pm on Apr 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

I have a view point not expressed here, I review all my link partners and to whom they are linking to as well.
I find allot of times my partners have gone from a good link to a questionable link.

If this link has gotten questionable I will add a no follow to it and revisit after some time to see if they have cleaned up the bad links on their site. If not the no follow remains or I delete them.

I am not in the pratice of hording page rank but I will not help a site that doesnt tend to it's business as it should.

I have found out if I try to help a site and send them information they are linked to a bad site, banned site etc, it offends them and we usually end up deleting links.

I am finding it very difficult to find good partners as most have just to much trash linked to their site for me to get involved with.

I use the no follow in this manner only If i see the site has cleaned up I will take the no follow off the link and pass page rank as well.

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