in-links using guestbooks?

[m2gg9]

Hope this is the correct forum...

I came across a website ranked #1 and I noticed that it has hundreds of incoming links coming from guestbooks. In fact, it looks like each guestbook entry is identical as if the posts were automated. My question is: wouldn't Google frown upon this? Does Google detect this sort of thing? Would Google punish the website for this?

Thanks,
Mark

[Yidaki]

>I still don't understand why to show the searchers those spammy results first and then apply the filters. Why not the other way round?

I'd say it could be due to the limited machine power. Remember they have *only* 57k machines - not enough to build a duplicate index. ;)

[Bio4ce]

Last night, the guestbook guys I follow were all gone from the serps. Not grey barred, just not showing up anywhere. Seems like google is reverting back and forth between several different versions of the index because they are back again on all the datacenters.

[edited by: Bio4ce at 3:51 pm (utc) on May 25, 2003]

[parabola]

Bio4 - I have witnessed the same. Gone last night, back today.

[europeforvisitors]

This would be a really bad way for Google to handle guestbook links. Much better to just negate them as having any value on PR or anchor text.

No, it wouldn't be a bad way, because a large number of guestbook links wouldn't be enough to get a site banned--it would be just one factor to be weighed in determining whether a site was artificially manipulating Google's search results. In other words, if the site were otherwise clean, the guestbook links wouldn't have any effect at all.

[davewray]

I actually found a PR7 guestbook!? Crazy stuff! ;) My hand was shaking I was SO tempted to sign it...but the angel on my right shoulder won :)

[davewray]

I've done a little research. I think many of you will find this "interesting" I did some research on our aforementionned guestbook spammer who is appearing in the #1 position for a very lucrative keyword. I checked out some of his/her backlinks to see what guestbooks they were submitting to. Well, I was surprised at what I found! I'm not going to give away any big secrets here, but this one particular person, within the text of their guestbook message, had SIX hidden URL links with keyword rich text! This person has SIX sites they are promoting with ONE guestbook entry. I went a little further...For each of the SIX keyword phrases this person was using, they appear #1, #1, #3, #3, #5, #5 for those respective keywords in Google! Another strange quirk too...4 of this person's sites are duplicates...another thing missed by the filters...

[NovaW]

No, it wouldn't be a bad way, because a large number of guestbook links wouldn't be enough to get a site banned--it would be just one factor to be weighed in determining whether a site was artificially manipulating Google's search results. In other words, if the site were otherwise clean, the guestbook links wouldn't have any effect at all.

Yes - but the issue is anybody can go any create guestbook page links for a competitors site & potentially hurt them. The easiest & best way to deal with guestbook links is just to ignore them.

[seofreak]

Not ignore them .. there are genuine signers too. google should follow the link .. but shouldn't give rank points from the guestbook

[steve128]

"actually found a PR7 guestbook!? Crazy stuff! ;) My hand was shaking I was SO tempted to sign it...but the angel on my right shoulder won :)

Sign it for me please, whose guest book was it... Nasa's?

[europeforvisitors]

the issue is anybody can go any create guestbook page links for a competitors site & potentially hurt them

That wouldn't be true if guestbook links by themselves weren't grounds for a penalty or exclusion.

We're talking about two different issues here: the transfer of PageRank and the identification of spam. Ignoring PR from guestbooks solves the first issue, but it's of no help with the second. For scaleability reasons, Google needs to automate the process of rooting out spam. If guestbook links are a technique used by spammers, then it makes sense to use them as one of many scoring factors or as a trigger for closer analysis. A Webmaster wouldn't have to worry that a competitor would create phony guestbook links with his URL unless he was already doing something shady.

[steveb]

Guestbook links are a dual problem, not just pagerank, or even mostly pagerank. Instant anchor text is a serious problem. The site I've noticed that ranks #1 for a term is not benefitting from the pagerank (something that would help them for all terms) but for the specific keyword that is the guestbook signature/anchor text.

[NovaW]

Guestbooks - ignore for PR & anchortext - it doesn't have to be any more complex than that. I don't follow the points about using it to assess spam etc. If your competition can manipulate how google see's your site then it would be a bad situation.

[rfgdxm1]

steveb, if Google can identify guestbooks and ignore links for PR, they can ignore the anchor text easily as well. As for PR, most guestbooks not only are low PR, but also have tons of links. Unless someone found that mythical guestbook with a PR8 that had few links, even if PR is counted a site ain't likely to get high PR from just guestbook links.

[steve128]

I don't get the idea of telling the difference re- spamming

Guestbooks, or paid for links?

So you "can advertise here for" $$ per month

or sign this guest book here for free.

Most guestbooks are very low PR figures, but people who buy links would not even bother with a PR5 or lower.

So who is spamming?

A lot of people seem to think, if I pay I am not a "real spammer"

Where I would say they are usually worst.

[NovaW]

my guess is guestbook hardly ever have any PR benefit. The benefit is the anchor text - I would assume that anybody who spams guestbooks is focused on that.

Buying links is rife. Google should have never added PageRank to the toolbar. In my opinion - that was a huge mistake.

[GrinninGordon]

I think Google should have a guestbook. I would put money that it would pretty much reflect their search returns at the moment :-). Sorry GG, I am sure you are working on it!

[davewray]

The site in question that has no backlinks BUT guestbook links has a PR5. Not too shabby considering it's just from guestbooks! And there are several PR7 guestbooks out there...but as a previous poster stated..there tends to be hundreds of links/page. Now, the anchor text...that's the biggie....

[davewray]

PR may not have been a good idea on Google's part, but hindsight is always 20/20 ;)

[shaadi]

...another thing missed by the filters...

Lets count them, I must have completed 100+ Spam reports to GoogleGuy but don't see any change at all, in fact these site are ranking much higher than before..

Best practices of SEO on Google…
1) Multiple domains.
2) Cross link multiple domains is-a-must with all your keywords in anchor.
3) Keyword rich Sub. Domains on all multiple domains with duplicate content.
4) Mirror sites with free-keyword-location.com domain - even you get a PR0 still you will rank #1 for free keyword location.
5) Expired, High PR, listed in ODP Y! L$, keyword rich domain is-icing-on-the-cake.
6) Hidden text, doorway pages, links from FFA all that stuff which SE-watch warned you with a penalty and ban.
7) Guest-book submissions, reciprocal links with all spammy shady sites.
8) Multiple listings in ODP, Y!, L$

Things to do to get banned on Google...
1) Use of clean hand coded HTML code with right use of H1, paragraph tags and relevant alt tags for images.
2) Links from good, high PR sites.
3) Creating content on regular basis.
4) Use of different, relevant title tags and description tags on each page.
5) Use of good text based navigation system, header, left-menu, footer etc.

Please help me to complete the list...

[rfgdxm1]

>Lets count them, I must have completed 100+ Spam reports to GoogleGuy but don't see any change at all, in fact these site are ranking much higher than before..

This may be your mistake. I'd have the good sense not to spam him if I actually was expecting results. ;)

[shaadi]

LOL

[added]100+ spam reports in 4 months time[/added]

[bob64]

Is this fiction?

<snip> Email offering guestbook spamming services</snip>

I can not believe it is this simple.

[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 6:09 pm (utc) on June 9, 2003]
[edit reason] TOS #9,#10 [/edit]

[bhartzer]

Nothing is guaranteed. If someone says they guarantee something then I would run far away from it.

[bob64]

But what about the strategy?

[ariff44]

guestbook links are given such low pr that what is passes to you may be virtually non-existant

[rfgdxm1]

Google actually is profiting by guestbook spamming. They still are selling Adwords to a company that openly advertise that the spam thousands of guestbooks for you at a price. (Google truly has no shame, or ethics for that matter, that they are knowingly selling ads to spammers.) My guess is that Google's eagerness to encourage people to spam all the guestbooks out there to death is that they already have designed filters to ignore guestbooks.

[Conard]

Guestbook links may be low in PR, but I have looked at a ton of sites sitting in the #1 spot for competitive terms with 5,000 guestbook links as the ONLY backlinks listed by Google.
If in fact the links were low PR they wouldn’t show up at all.
It may have been a waste of time when Google was on top of it, but they have their hands full right now trying to desperately fix a broken system.
In the mean time there are a bunch of sites making some serious cash off of this little trick.

[GoogleGuy]

Conard, just because a site shows in the backlinks doesn't mean that it contribute much (or any) PageRank to a site. rfgdxm1, you've mentioned these ads a couple times now. I went looking with the phrases I would expect and didn't see ads for this?

[steveb]

From what I see guestbook links are all about the anchor text. The PR means nothing. 2000 guestbook links from PR3 and below sites gets a #1 ranking for a competitive term.

[Seattle_SEM]

GoogleGuy - How's that "longer than weeks, shorter than months" doing for the next update?

I'm sitting on the edge of my seat, here ;-)
Thanks.