---- 6-week old site disappeared from SERPs around March 1
TheOptimizationIdiot - 2:52 am on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
The anchor text of most of the links was the name of the site/domain - don't see how that's unnatural.
When the site/domain name linked is not in a proportional relative to the number of links and varied anchor text expected out of the whole of links to a site in the same niche it could easily be considered unnatural in my opinion.
In other words, if you have 95% of inbound links with the site/domain name as the anchor and most in your niche have 58.3% with 41.7% being varied, yours could be unnatural (not like the others).
Matt Cutts has said that the rate of link acquisition/link velocity is largely irrelevant to rankings.
Interesting interpretation, I thought he says get as many links as you can via natural linking, which would in my opinion, include naturally varied anchor text, not linking to the site/domain name at a higher than expected rate relative to the whole, and things along those lines, which would I think include an expected rate of "new link finding" relative to number of pages spidered over time, etc. but maybe I'm missing something?
Google doesn't consider traffic/analytics data for rankings
How about click-through from the results or click-through, click back (or search again), click on another result, meaning the search did not end on your site/page (iow your site was not the right answer)?
Is that addressed in the video cited also? If it was, I missed it, so please, point out where, because I'm curious how they would not use click-through, click back (or search again), click on a different result as a factor to indicate whether your site/page was "the right answer" to a query or not.