Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I wonder if google will retract this NOFOLLOW idea when every single site on the net marks every single link they've got NOFOLLOW. My understanding of it is that you lose PR for any link you have that aren't so marked...
This is what the econ folks call a "Nash Equilibrium" where we're each of us going to lose a little in order not to be the sucker who loses a lot. I think this NOFOLLOW thing is silly, but I sure don't want to be the sucker.
I'm not sure if that's directed at me, and whether I created some confusion or was unclear. To clarify, when I spouted off about "you added the link in the first place," I'm referring to non-blog sites.
martingale, you're our test case. Please let us know if you sink or swim.
Simple solution was to check all of his back links, crawl those sites for email addresses, send out one message to all explaining what the x-link exchange partner is doing.
Sure hope it's not you martingale.
Boy, that's an awfully nasty thing to do... I like it!
I didn't nofollow my recip links, which are on a page by themselves where they don't really matter anyway. I nofollow'd the external links on every "normal" page.
I nofollow'd the external links on every "normal" page.
What's your overall objective?
TJ
[edited by: webmasterguy at 3:59 am (utc) on Jan. 27, 2005]
If you want to read the updated entry in the Google blog, copy and paste this link into your favourite browser, and remove the space from between "google" and "blog"!
www.google.com/google blog/2005/01/preventing-comment-spam.html
It would seem that webmasterguy failed to notice that that link has already been posted in this thread twice, plus the link in his message doesn't work.
If you want to read the updated entry in the Google blog, copy and paste this link into your favourite browser, and remove the space from between "google" and "blog"!
Wow. A bit touchy today are we?:)
Oh, does it show? ;)
Now I'm not singling anyone out, but sometimes I can't help but think that although folks see the posts, they don't read them. And then when they post, they don't check to see if the link they posted actually works.
This thread [webmasterworld.com] is an excellent example; same link posted in five messages straight (and seven in total), over the course of 21 hours.
.....
I found a site in a very competitive sector that has nofollowed all their OBLs. At the moment it's PR4 (homepage) with about 6 dozen backlinks, and a number of freshdates from this week. Obviously crawled since nofollow burst onto the scene, but I think it's still worth keeping an eye on, in case we don't hear back from martingale.
Hoarding PR.
Well, if that's your overall objective, go for it.
I'd anticipate a drop in traffic though.
TJ
Gotta agree. Sites are naturally meant to link to others. Basically, what you've done is remove the links (to simplify the effect of the tag) to all the quality sites you felt were really worth linking to from your site. As a result, your site now only links to your hopefully half way decent link partners - who all are likely recip linking with the same circle of people as you. You're hoarding PR, but also changing the naturalness of your linking patterns. I'm interested to hear your results though.
Not I know this is where people are going to start squawking about blog spammers. I'll defer once again and say that if you can't maintain your own blog/site then maybe you have no business running it to begin with. By simply adding 'no-follow' to the link you're saying "I'm leaving this worthless link because I'm too freaking lazy to do anything else".
Blog spammers only do it because the technique works right now. And it will continue to work until the engines decide to factor around it.
I'll build my sites with quality content and link out when it's helpful to my users. I'll utilize simple verification methods that block blind posts to guestbooks and blogs. I'll maintain my site and remove anything that it overtly commercial or inappropriate. It's all part of the responsibility of being a site owner.
