Forum Moderators: open
its about time google put an end to link exchange which is really nothing but linkage spam.
I apologize for being so snappy, please forgive me. You're obviously not a moron and I over-reacted to your post. I'm a retard sometimes and I need to learn to have more patience.
I agree with you that one needn't violate their moral standards to rank well, but that was implicit in original claim. I think the claim was wrong, but it was what it was.
One other point if it's not too much. You said:
Just because a person does not wish to get links from a certain industry, why should that dictate how things fall for everybody else?
but this is why I said I'm not sure about the whole thing (*marks undecided on the ballet*)...because the tables (seemingly) can be turned relatively easily:
Just because a person does wish to get links from a certain industry, why should that dictate how things fall for everybody else?
I personally think in the end it will probably come down to what Google thinks is most pragmatic (i.e., the ratios of dos to don'ts), and throwing dust in the air probably won't change a single thing.
Anyhow, again, I apologize for my rudeness and impatience and hope you are not too offended.
Jordan
There is a software package available from a highly ranked SEO that links to all of the people who are linking to you. This is done to help boost the relevance of their links. I am curious, is this considered unethical search engine manipulation? If not, is it worth purchasing?
Thanks
If you want to rank, you have to pay your dues. Put the time in and learn the language that Google speaks. Either that, or pay someone to do it for you.
The Internet, like any other venue for earning money, is driven by competition. In the real world, store owners send out flyers, make phone calls, swap referrals with competitors for products or services that the other might be better equipped for, or pay for advertising in publications. To compete, you have to do what it takes, while staying within the bounds of what's acceptable.
People get upset over all the little 'rules' we have to follow to get ranking. But think of it this way - all it costs you is time. I could never have started a business in the real world because I lacked the finances to initiate such an endeavor. But I have 2 resources - time, and a bit of grey matter. Everyone here has this as well, so put your time in, pay your dues, and the rest will come.
Regarding links pages, I have two thoughts:
1) If hand-categorized, they serve to organize the web even further.
2) My main site has a reciprocal links section. It's all white-bars, but comes up page 1 for various key-phrases that generate a fair amount of traffic. Yes, I optimize my links pages - for the sites they link to. That's my little favor for people that swap links with me.
3) It seems silly to rename your links pages something other than links to try to trick search engines. I could write a script that would compare the number of links to external sites vs. remaining content on a page and based on the proportions it would determine if it was a 'links page.' Come on, like Google doesn't know what 'resources' pages are...?
4) swapping links is what the Internet is all about. Continue to do it, that's why it's called the inter-net, or world-wide-web. connections.
I understand that returning a link to the person's home page is a normal use of link exchanging. What I am curious about is links to the exact link pages that are linking to you, to artificially increase that exact pages link popularity. Thus increasing the value passed back onto you. Wouldn't this be considered unethical?
No. Although it might upset the webmaster you're "trading" with.
Out of 100, I got 8 PR4 or higher sites to link to me. Disappointed.
So at this point, should I try and link to food, marketing, etc. sites?
jd
To the person who posted previously that those of us with PR0 sites never get requests to exchange links. NOT TRUE. I have a PR0 site (not sure why), and I get requests on a daily basis to exchange links. Why? Because I am listed high in Google for many keyphrases. Perhaps it is not impossible to think that maybe people want to link to me because I offer useful information? Heaven forbid!
Sure, it is grunt work sometimes trying to find good sites to link to and vice versa, but I feel it is well worth it. A "non-linking" web is not any kind of web at all. It is a bunch of unconnected dots. What good does that do anyone? Imagine a user going to a site and saying to him/herself, "Hmmm...can't find what I was looking for here..no links to follow either..Now what do I do?". Suck it up people and put the time in to not only make your site successful, BUT also useful :)
Dave.
So at this point, should I try and link to food, marketing, etc. sites?
To the person who posted previously that those of us with PR0 sites never get requests to exchange links. NOT TRUE. I have a PR0 site (not sure why), and I get requests on a daily basis to exchange links. Why? Because I am listed high in Google for many keyphrases. Perhaps it is not impossible to think that maybe people want to link to me because I offer useful information? Heaven forbid!Exactly! Not everyone (very few actually) has the toolbar installed. Those that do are more likely to know that many pages have or had gone white bar. My links page went to a white bar simultaneously with my site's move to number one for a very popular keyphrase. My link requests went up dramatically. Additionally, as one who does have the toolbar installed, I will trade links with a whitebar without batting an eye if it is a match otherwise.
Thanks - Johnny Dequino
One thing I noticed today and I wanted to share was the existence of the Link Development Forum / Forum 12. Up until today I was a Google News junky and don't ask me how or why, but I ended up in forum 12 and it took me 6 hours of reading to get me out of it again. and that were only the posts from 2001/2002.
Having read some insights from paynt I now can call myself a trully reformed webmaster and have found a new belief. I want to be a flower! and before you think I lost the plot start reading some phenomenal posts, which I have not seen referenced to often enough in the Google News forums:
Link Campaing Research [webmasterworld.com] - Great insights into getting the link campaign on the right track
Link Strategies – To Build Presence and Gain Exposure [webmasterworld.com]
logical and insightful continuation on the topic of building a link strategy
One Way Linking [webmasterworld.com] - The ultimate read, especially post #34 is worth the hall of fame for link strategies.
"there is no evidence that link exchange pages on the whole are being devalued"
Sorry, just saying it does not make it so. If you can not objectively look at how certain link pages have dropped in the SERPs for certain search terms, then your simply looking for evidence in the Weekly World News or Beano and quoting it as global fact is your problem. And I expect you to disagree with anything I say following your torrent of grudge emails to me (people should be aware of this, as it shows you have an agenda when you reply to my postings and therefore your comments need to be read with this in mind).
PR derives from the ideology that links to websites mean site A reccommends site B. that ideology again is derived from the simple understanding that people follow links. and that is something too many webmasters seem to have forgotten.
Yes, the Search Engines have become our ****s and we spread our legs each time we spot an algo change and nobody can tickle our c* softer than googlebot does. but what if the ****s left? could we look after ourselves out there in the Internet?
I am glad to say that I can. I'm happy to elaborate more on that in a different thread. But thanks to forum 12 I will be able to make sure that my linking strategy will be based on surviving the SE war and creating a website that is there to stay.
Sorry, just saying it does not make it so. If you can not objectively look at how certain link pages have dropped in the SERPs for certain search terms, then your simply looking for evidence in the Weekly World News or Beano and quoting it as global fact is your problem.
Although it's extremely common and I wouldn't fault anyone for doing it, it's not smart to name a link page .html, or .php.
However having said that, there is no real evidence that Google is singling out link pages and penalizing them.
That's misleading info and a matter of offering your *opinion* as fact.
Like good little whores they will exchange links with anyone and rapidly build up rankings in the serps. The result of course is they get first crack at the customers being ranked #1 while others not interested in playing this game of link prostitution get less Google referals and hence less sales.
Now thats just plain wrong.
Perhaps everyone would have been mystified at the relevancy of the SERPS, link-inflation never would have started, spammers would still be keyword stuffing their meta-tags and the Google SERPS would have remained relevant?
"GrinninGordon, get a grip"
Funny, shall I publish your stickies to me and let people see who has a grip, or rather who does not? :-)
"I simply posted an alternate opinion:"
Not correct, you previously said "there is no evidence" but failed to state this as opinion or where you looked.
As I have pointed out before, I have seen certain link pages drop in SERPs, and others climb. Also, generally, I can see a pattern in the highly unreliable boogiebar. I currently have a link directory page (not called that) on the 14th page for a competitive search term, and I know why. Previously I have seen other link pages ranking fairly high for some search terms, and they have since fallen beyond the point of being able to find them. They have also PR0 / PR1 in the boogiebar, where they had PR5 before.
Maybe it is a coincidence, but I suspect not. But it is evidence in the true sense.
"GrinninGordon, get a grip"
Funny, shall I publish your stickies to me
You have my full permission. As long as you publish yours as well.</end of PM's discussion>
Previously I have seen other link pages ranking fairly high for some search terms, and they have since fallen beyond the point of being able to find them.
Why would a link page place highly in the SERPS for any compititive terms? Sounds like an awful result and if they're no-longer showing in high placement than it's a very good thing.
You stated that your link page has dropped in the SERPS. Although Google might not be working in your favor, it's still an example of the system working.
But it doesn't mean that link pages on the whole are being penalized as far as PR goes. If that is truly the case than a LOT of people here will be in *major* trouble. In a lot of cases some peoples PR's will competely plummet due to the fact that most of their links were coming from link pages that now have a PR of 0 or a 1.
Also wouldn't that be unfair considering that DMOZ as well as the Google directory are nothing but glorified link pages?
I think it's better to recommend not to name a link page .html or .php, than to out-right offer a radical opinion as a fact,
They have also PR0 / PR1 in the boogiebar, where they had PR5 before.
Maybe it is a coincidence, but I suspect not. But it is evidence in the true sense.
The PR display on the toolbar can't be taken as accurate in all cases.
BTW....one of my sites has links coming from 2 different link pages; one named .php and the other .html, and both link pages are still the same PR 5 they've been the last few months.
Dave.
I think your case of receiving link request is quite a special and unique one, but I agree with you that PR0 sites are able to get link partners. The problem is that it is much and much more diffucult than before, especially at the time when Google display "Grey" bar instead of "White".
PR0 is already a major obstacle in requesting links from well-established sites, but another major problem that I often saw is the webmasters' strategy and approach in sorting out link exchange themselves. The common weaknesses in some PR0 sites seeking for links are the "lousy" preparation of link structure, no potential for being a good link partner in the future and worst yet, the "lousy" link exchange request.
Combining these weaknesses with PR0, no doubt why people don't want to link back.
The thing is, there's a whole new industry springing up with outsourcing link hunting. Link Brokers with databases - a viable new business model.
