fathom - 2:08 am on Apr 14, 2012 (gmt 0)

Well it seems like negative SEO works. I tried it on an old domain of mine that never had been SEOed because it had a natural SEO rankings (PR7). I made the site years 8 years ago and gave away free stuff (thus why there was lots of links to it). I bought $500 worth of ezine articles, xrumered blasted it with profile/ blog posts and can confirm that the site now appears on page 7, where it use to be on page #1 for at least the past 4 years. Furthermore, I tried this on two other domains I had and both of those sites are now way back in the index where they previously held page #1 and page #2. The new update basically means NEGATIVE SEO is going to flourish now.

Forgive my ignorance but I thought the alleged purpose of Negative SEO was to harm the other guy?

You have 100% conversion rate on your own domains... maybe you should try it on websites that you don't own to prove conclusively that you as the owner isn't the common denominator.

<added>
I found this in your profile:

[webmasterworld.com...]

np2003 wrote: I think I know how Google trusts a link... I tried this idea about 7 months ago on a keyword that had over a million searches per month. I can report back now that for the past 2 months, 8 of these sites have been on page 1/2 for that keyword term... It's actually a very simple but time consuming strategy and best of all was pretty cheap to setup. Remember, Google is looking for "natural" link patterns. Sending an email out or getting a link on a PR9 site just smells like link buying and that will get you no where. I know coz I tried that (paid $2k mo) for twox PR9 sites and got nothing after 6 months.

Sure sounds like your negative SEO is what you are describing here... but pre-loses and it didn't work so well... promoting wise.

Flip Flopping?
</added>