Marcia - 4:14 am on Feb 11, 2003 (gmt 0)

Completely objective opinion: Some we see are definitely playing with fire, it's blatant and they're well aware that they can get burnt. If they get trounced, they'll just do more.

Others may *seem* dodgy but really aren't, they're just very good SEO, albeit possibly right on the edge, particularly when it comes to cross-linking issues. Some out there play link text and Page Rank like a finely tuned violin.

I never assume keyword-stuffing is what gets some sites high rankings. I don't even see much of that at all and what I do see of it is not what I think is getting the results. It always pays to study carefully what those folks are doing, they're some of the smartest cookies around.

I'm studying one group of 8 sites now (all on the same topic, same products, same *safe* hosting) that at first glance seems like they're being unethical and taking excessive risk with cross-linking, but on further examination they're the tip of the iceberg. Digging has uncovered much more. It's like finding buried treasure - we just have to know how to spot the gold when we're panning.

From a practical standpoint, not even going near ethics, it would be very silly to even consider reporting them, even though it's uphill competing against them. They're not technically violating any of the "guidelines" except for manipulating Page Rank - which we ALL do to some degree, just as soon as we learn how, if we'll be honest enough to admit it.

If we find sites that are consistently ranking high because of what we perceive to be excellent SEO, particularly a number by the same people, it's an opportunity to learn from the best in the business we'd be fools to pass up. The clumsy ones who throw pop-ups at us and use crude techniques are best gone, imho, but the genuine artists give us an opportunity for a higher education.