fathom - 5:12 am on Apr 12, 2012 (gmt 0)
Also, just want to add, you can assume that the folks analyzing these websites in our experiences have plenty of experience in the industry in all types of verticals, and I'll leave it at that. No "$99 SEO Backlink Checkup Doctor" providers here lol. This isn't just "the first thing seen", trust me. These websites are going through all different types of tests by different people as well...
Maybe they can enlightening us. I sure would love to debate the merits of their findings.
I don't follow the Google sabotage line? So we should accept what Google says in this case in terms of it being very rare? Didn't they tell us to build quality content and people in our industry will simply naturally link to us and our site will rank for worthwhile terms...all the while developing and flaunting the most aggressively link-reliant algo in history?
I don't recommend anyone blindly follow anyone... but I also recommend not trusting anyone who anonymously retorts ..."No "$99 SEO Backlink Checkup Doctor" providers here"... and "trust me".
I'm sorry if I trust what I am actually seeing happening all across the board vs what Google is telling folks. I wish I could just sit back and smile and say "No worries guys, I'm sure they've got a handle on this simply because all of us won't ever know what is EXACTLY really happening over there".
Well I'll tell you what... before the end of April I will review your domain since your domain is part of the Google thread.
I will post my finding in the supporters forum.
Do other folks here feel OK with all of this happening? Just figured some other folks would have issues with this type of environment going forward which is why it should be discussed IMO...
Enlightening people about the dangers of SEO is something I take very seriously. But you can't address the problem by ignoring the LIKELY problem.
I believe ignorance causes most of the problems.