What if Google emailed webmasters for each new link?

[cabbie]

Just had a brainwave.
I quite a few sites in my webmaster tools account. Not all mine and some are penalised for unnatural link penalty.I did try to argue with Google about them, as many of the links they called unnatural were not at all and were over 10 yrs old but in the end I just gave up and those sites are still penalised.

i was thinking, I get heaps of emails from all of my domains and Gmail does a pretty good job of screening the spam emails from the genuine ones.
They do let some spam emails through, however, and I am happy to post them myself in the spam folder.

Why doesn't Google do something similar with new backlinks it crawls for sites in their webmaster Tools account?
Call the obvious ones spam and then email webmaster saying "We have found a new link to your website webmasterworld.com. Please verify the link as genuine or spam."
Then us webmasters can choose to disown it or adopt it, and Google takes note.
I reckon these are emails most webmasters would be happy to read, and Google would have a better idea of who is trying to game the system.


How about it Google?

[goodroi]

On the surface it is a nice idea but just not feasible. Spammers would love for this to happen. It would make it much easier to reverse engineer the secret Google algo and figure out which spambot/paid/hacked link gets past Google's filter. You could offer up a sacrificial site to get intentionally banned and then know exactly which links get through Google.

Google already has a very good idea who is trying to game the system. They have applied for several patents that hint at ways they might be identifying & defending against rank manipulators like me. For example if you adjust your title tag each day for 5 days in a row, you are likely trying to get a SEO advantage. If you buy expensive links with identical anchor text and double your links overnight you are likely trying to manipulate rankings. If you publish 1000 auto generated pages on your 10 page site, you are likely trying to game the system. Google isn't stupid.

In life one should never underestimate their adversary and Google is more adversary than friend.

[EditorialGuy]

I'd also add:

1) Too much overhead (for everyone, not just for Google).

2) Most site owners aren't able to make informed judgments about the quality of inbound links from unfamiliar sites.

In life one should never underestimate their adversary and Google is more adversary than friend.

Google is neither an adversary or a friend, unless you choose to make Google your adversary. The important thing to remember is that Google's mission is to serve its end users, not to serve you.

[Shaddows]

Google is neither an adversary or a friend, unless you choose to make Google your adversary.

I'm going to be generous and assume this is linguistic pedantry.

Incorporating Google traffic into your business model necessitates considering the situation as a competitive-cooperative relationship. I suppose "if-you-build-it-they-will-come" is an alternative 'strategy' but surely one that obviates any need to participate on fora dedicated to understanding Google?

In the friend/cooperative column, you create content for their users - they send you some of their users. Guidelines stop you going horrifically off track.

In the adversary/competitive column, there is the fact that sites want to rank as well as possible, while Google needs to negate technical tricks. Google seeks to control site behaviour, and forces sites to do things they would not otherwise do. You can argue if this is good for users, but fundamentally it is what Google thinks is good for users.

If you are ever inclined to disagree with the judgement of a politician as to what is best for you/others, you must accept at least the possibility that you can disagree with Google about what is best for you/others. At which point, do you implement Google's or your own preferred option?

You can de-personalise it, by thinking of your site like a farm (or a ship), with Google the weather. But the difference is the weather does not change JUST BECAUSE someone works out a really good way to harness it.

[EditorialGuy]

In the friend/cooperative column, you create content for their users - they send you some of their users. Guidelines stop you going horrifically off track.

Or you can create content for your users or target audience, and the search engines will make it available to their users via search results.

It's a symbiotic relationship, and the concept predates Google.

[glakes]

There's a lot you can do with Google Alerts if you are good at it.