Forum Moderators: martinibuster
<a href="javascript:window.location='http://www.domain.com'" onmouseover="window.status='http://www.domain.com'; return true"
onmouseout="window.status=' '; return true" target="_blank">Domain website</a>
It looks like Google is counting these links now, because I see my site in the results when I search for "link:www.domain.com" for example.
I'm still thinking about what I will do.
Can Google give a ban (or penalty) to sites that are using the javascript method above by linking to other sites?
Is it better to change this to "normal" links and remove the javascript?
Many thanks.
Pretend you are Google, looking for ways to derate black-hat sites.
What would be easier than so check for PR hogging of this obvious kind?
All my outbound links are of the <A REF="h**p://www.otherguy.html" kind.
Any site linking in with a phony php gizmo can rest assured I will never reciprocate. -Larry
Intuitive Justification -- PageRank can be thought of as a model of user behavior. We assume there is a "random surfer" who is given a web page at random and keeps clicking on links, never hitting "back" but eventually gets bored and starts on another random page. The probability that the random surfer visits a page is its PageRank.
Given that a percentage (up to 15% depending on which figures you believe) of surfers do not have JS turned on, it would make sense for Google to penalise non-JS links in the same proportion.
That exactly models the random surfer which (ignoring side-issues like number of links) is exactly what Google is trying to do.
Are you saying that all link pages that contain php in the address aren't passing PR?
still the surfer did want to go there...
<<added>> strange, the thought of a natural surfer "never hitting back", I wonder what natural statistics are on "hitting the back button"...<</added>>
So if I understand you good it's better to use javascript links?
Are there still people that can tell me if Google can give a penalty to sites that are using javascript links?
I meant to write:
it would make sense for Google to penalise Javascript links in the same proportion.
JS-only links are bad for other spiders as well, so they are not something you'd want unless you are very clear about the issues involved.
" Larry
Are you saying that all link pages that contain php in the address aren't passing PR?"
Not any more. At one time I think that was true, that they didn't pass PR.
I don't honestly know if they pass any benefit to the linked-to sites/pages. It may depend on the Engine.
What I'm saying is that the "referring" site is playing dirty pool, or trying to.
I'm not about to provide an honest link to some site that plays these games, not by a long shot.
Another pet peeve is putting my pages in somebody elses frames,
but I don't want to drift too far off topic. I can break out of frames nicely.
The best thing G, Y and MSN could do, would be to pass PR thru ALL kinds of working links.
That one single device would put a stop to all this nonsense.
Webmasters could use honest links just to shorten and simplify their code if nothing else.
Scraper sites (I can name a few) would actually pass credit to their victims.
I know, it makes too much sense. Sorry - Larry
Probably not, but this is link-fraud, and you can expect some kind of action from the offended party. For example, a quick check for dirty seo-tricks and report to google.
>The best thing G, Y and MSN could do, would be to pass PR thru ALL kinds of working links. That one single device would put a stop to all this nonsense.
G, Y, & MSN should do this, but I doubt webmasters will stop trying tricks. There is too much "Seo" ill-advice around. Think meta-keywords, they are useless in Google and pretty much elsewhere, since about 2000, still a part of seo-strategy to so many.
A software tool that detects all kinds of link-fraud would do.
R
