Marcia - 6:47 am on Jul 24, 2007 (gmt 0)

>>I'm wondering if it would work equally well to block access to a "Links.html" page by using a disallow in robots.txt?

I'm not saying it's the cause, but I've just seen a site at the very end of 950+ doing just that. IMHO it's a big red flag that a site is manipulating links in a BIG way. I can't see the logic in Google rewarding people for having "one way links" who are cheating by saying they're exchanging links and then going back on their agreement.

I'd think that unnatural linking patterns of any kind would be far worse than relevant recips.

Forget the fearmongers and use your own common sense. Focus on creating the kind of site(s) and relationships that Google OUGHT to be favoring, and over the long term you'll be okay.

Exactly. Recips have been around since the early days of personal homepages exchanging links for their pet and cooking sites, they're natural and normal lnking. But they didn't link to or exchange with debt-consolidation-mortgage-refinance-cheap-airline-tickets-location-weddings-viagra.com

Added:
Incidentally, I believe they can also easily spot when "link sections" are moved off to another domain. I've seen such a case recently and having what happen to be on-topic, related links removed and the IBLs all become one-way didn't help one iota.

In fact, the site has dropped a bit from what it used to be, and who knows but that it might have a few "demerits" that are because of that kind of an unnatural pattern. The other site links back and forth with the original, it's really a no-brainer exercise in futility.

[edited by: Marcia at 6:58 am (utc) on July 24, 2007]