Is link spam the only way to create backlinks?

[ShanghaiTours]

There are also some non-spammy ways, but yeah just as some has mentioned, they are slower and harder.

[Linus_Ruzicka]

Interesting topic in it's relation in time to something I have been working on recently.
I just did 2 blog posts (part 1 and part 2) talking about Part 1 - creating backlinks and how do you use them, and in part 2 Creating quality backlinks and a cool tool I use - not to auto comment, but to find the right blogs to comment on (with Google rankings), I talked about how to make them quality backlinks by posting them on blogs with a high Google page rank.

You can read the second post on how I am creating quality backlinks (quality because of the page they sit on) and doing it in a VERY non-spammy, non-pitchy method.

The tool i use to help find quality blogs with a high Google rank to comment on is Comment Hut. Another one I heard about recently is Comment Kahuna - but I have NOT used that one yet. Only Comment Hut.

THe second blog post I created goes into more detail of why this is a non-spammy method.

As a new member here in the forum, I can't post direct links, but if you just look for my blog Linus Ruzicka .com you can find them

[dwatrous]

Holy cow, you leave for a day and look what happens.

In some ways these ideas are helpful because there are some persuasive arguments on each side. For that same reason I'm not sure it's answering my question about what link spam is and if it's the only way to get backlinks.

The conclusion I've been drawing for myself based on everything I've read on backlinks so far is that I have to feel OK with it. At the end of the day I have to answer to myself about whether or not I've added value to my niche.

That's the crux of it for me. "Did I add value with what I just put somewhere on the internet?"

While "value" appears to mean different things to different people, I know what it means to me, so this thread has been very useful.

Thanks for all the replies (and banter).

[jazbo]

Could you argue that adding a "spammy" link somewhere to get your "quality" content to more people through the SERPs, is adding value? Ultimately you are trying to boost what you perceive as valuable content?

[dwatrous]

Originally Posted by jazbo

Could you argue that adding a "spammy" link somewhere to get your "quality" content to more people through the SERPs, is adding value? Ultimately you are trying to boost what you perceive as valuable content?

That may not be an easy question to answer. If you think it's valuable, but your target audience doesn't thinks it's valuable enough to link to, then is it really?

Then there's the question of the market where the target audience doesn't actually have access to any link building mechanism. If the market you're targeting doesn't have a high proportion of customers/partners that could naturally generate links then the Google approach fails those searchers and every IMer in that market must use "unnatural means" to get links.

Even in that case, I think that writing informative articles, blogs, etc. for the links is the biggest value add. Certainly more so than a stuffed forum profile.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by dwatrous

That may not be an easy question to answer. If you think it's valuable, but your target audience doesn't thinks it's valuable enough to link to, then is it really?

Your target market doesn't know you exist until you promote the site so their failure to link to you says nothing about your content not being valuable. Guaranteed within the next few months you will come across sites you find valuable but just found even though they have been around for years.

then the Google approach fails those searchers and every IMer in that market must use "unnatural means" to get links.

What is natural or unnatural? really. Its often talked about but no one defines it in todays web experience. It is no longer "natural" for a webmaster to see a site and say " Hey I think I will link to it" - its now totally "unnatural" as in uncommon. Webmasters link to stories and news that some site breaks perhaps but then you have to be in a position to break news. . Link exchanges are unnatural, writing articles and putting links at the end of it is unnatural. To you signatures on forums are unnatural, filling out an "about me" section is supposedly unnatural (although some sites give you places to specifically leave links AND anchor text and filling it out would normally be considered natural).

Meanwhile I can't think of anything more unnatural to the search experience than those results to the side that Google calls adwords which defies the entire purpose for sorting content by virtue of relevance by making it about whoever pays the most for the spot.

and how more spammy can you get than dropping indescriminate text ads on a page of content that may have very little to offer the reader. What do they call that again? oh

Adsense. The most spammy kind of ads I have ever seen on the Net.

Even in that case, I think that writing informative articles, blogs, etc. for the links is the biggest value add. Certainly more so than a stuffed forum profile.

Your stuck on forum profiles. alleged link spam goes way beyond forums and actually embraces profile section that allow for informative articles and blogs..

[FlashDriveDT]

You do need backlinks to get ahead - thats a fact. Now the less spammy you do it the more you get ahead actually. So no worries. When you set up a profile with some description or bio and place one backlink and then take the time to contribute somewhere on that site you not only leave a breadcrumb so google can index that profile with its link but youre also leaving with a good conscience. Same goes for posting in a forum where you're genuinely allowed to have a backlink in your signature.

[garyt]

I think Terry's method is not spam although a bit sneeky. The other ways like article marketing , social bookmarking, social networking, video, viral marketing work too. It is just a matter of throwing in the mix

[jasonmorgan]

I think Terry's method is not spam although a bit sneeky.

so you don't mind if I start leaving comments on your blog with links to my sites? NICE!

btw... I'm thinking about promoting e cigarettes and the fleshlight, hope linking to these products isn't a problem.

also... fix your damn captcha, I've got sites that need new links.

[Pat Jackson]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

so you don't mind if I start leaving comments on your blog with links to my sites? NICE!

Err, Terry's method isn't doing that at all.

We register at sites that allow people to create profiles. We then leave a link in said profile, again, in accordance with what the sites in question allow us to do.

Not only is it not spam, it's not even against the sites terms of service.

Spam is sending unsolicited commercial messages. It's definitely not the same thing.

[jasonmorgan]

Err, Terry's method isn't doing that at all.

We register at sites that allow people to create profiles. We then leave a link in said profile, again, in accordance with what the sites in question allow us to do.

Not only is it not spam, it's not even against the sites terms of service.

Spam is sending unsolicited commercial messages. It's definitely not the same thing.

you need to reread that thread and take a closer look at his backlinks and the methods used.

yes... he uses automated tools to spam blogs. I've seen his generic spam comments myself when I'm checking up on my own generic spam comments.

If you read between the lines, the one of the big conclusion of the whole thread is 'spam works' and 'automation tools make it easy'

and anybody trying to defend profile backlinks as not being spam is just as delusional as the black hat spam queen herself.

*edit... maybe spam is the wrong word... how about self promoting crap links... or pissing in the internet pool for fun and profit.

[Pat Jackson]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

and anybody trying to defend profile backlinks as not being spam is just as delusional as the black hat spam queen herself.

*edit... maybe spam is the wrong word... how about self promoting crap links... or pissing in the internet pool for fun and profit.

Yes, spam was the wrong word. Spam is illegal, creating profiles for links is not.

So what if they're self promoting?

Do you submit articles to article directories? What for?

How about using social bookmarking sites? What for?

The fact is, as internet marketers, just about every link we leave anywhere is self promoting.

You're not going to go very far in this game without "self promoting" links.

In addition, leaving automated comments on a blog is not spam.

If you leave a stupid one liner comment saying, "nice post" and your name is hyperlinked, that is not spam. Sure, it's a useless, worthless comment but it's still not spam.

If, however, you left a comment saying, "Click this link and buy viagra right now!!" or anything commercial like that, then yes, that is spam.

I guess I'm just sick of everyone throwing the term "spam" around so loosely.

[jasonmorgan]

gotcha

I'm not trashing these methods. I use them everyday and other devious methods.

While these methods may not technically be 'spam', that doesn't mean they are right.

Joining a site for the sole purpose of creating a profile to add backlinks... and doing this on hundreds or thousands of sites... this is not white hat and it's not a very moral or ethical means of doing business. Not technically spam, but we don't have a better term for this yet.

It's a loophole in the system that is being abused for our own purposes... to boost our sites so we make money.

The same goes for blog commenting and automation. Anybody who thinks that using an automation tool to leave generic comments on thousands of blogs for the sole purpose of creating backlinks is not a means of (insert word to replace spamming here) is living in denial. Anybody with common sense should know that it's wrong.

If any of these methods were acceptable then we wouldn't have profile sites making profiles viewable to members only or in some cases refusing new memberships. Profiles wouldn't be deleted when they are caught. Bloggers wouldn't have to moderate all of their comments or use captchas. There would be no need for akismet.

I have emails and websites on spammer lists for using these methods so somebody thinks it's spamming... AngelaE has a whole crap-load of emails on the same lists, guess somebody thinks she is a spammer too.

so, people need to get of their SEO moral high ground and stop pretending that what they are doing isn't a form of spamming (or whatever you want to call it).

[Pat Jackson]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

Joining a site for the sole purpose of creating a profile to add backlinks... and doing this on hundreds or thousands of sites... this is not white hat and it's not a very moral or ethical means of doing business. Not technically spam, but we don't have a better term for this yet.

White hat is a very subjective term. Technically, anything you do to try and game the search engines is black hat. Again, using social bookmarking sites for backlinks is "black hat".

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

If any of these methods were acceptable then we wouldn't have profile sites making profiles viewable to members only or in some cases refusing new memberships. Profiles wouldn't be deleted when they are caught. Bloggers wouldn't have to moderate all of their comments or use captchas. There would be no need for akismet.

Ah, yeah they would, for real spam. Like the viagra example I used in my last post, that is the the reason for them.

As for profiles getting deleted and Angela's name ended up on spam lists, that's because all of those webmasters have no idea why these profiles are being created.

If I ran a forum and knew nothing about SEO then I would also assume that anyone signing up and leaving links in their profile has the intentions of starting threads and spamming my forum. However, this is simply not the case.

In fact, when I create a profile, my intentions are the exact opposite of a spammer. An ideal situation for me is that NOBODY sees my profile. I don't want any human eyes on my profiles.

The moderators are the only people who ever see these profiles, anyway. I mean, how many people do you know who trawl through forum member lists for no reason? 99.9% of the members of each these forums have no idea my profiles exist.

The sad truth is that as long as Google rankings depend on links there is going to be people creating self serving links at all costs.

When I first started out I decided that I wanted to be squeaky clean and not do anything that might be considered grey/black hat, however, shortly after I realised that if I'm not going to do it then I'm already going to be way behind my competitors.

So long as I'm not breaking any laws or sabotaging anyones business, I'll go after links in just about any means possible.

I'm sure there are a few exceptions to this rule, however, I can't think of any right now.

[jasonmorgan]

Ah, yeah they would, for real spam. Like the viagra example I used in my last post, that is the the reason for them.

what is the difference between creating a profile or leaving a comment with a link to a viagra site or a movie poster site? It's the same thing. Why is that real spam but links to Florida vacation homes aren't?

As for profiles getting deleted and Angela's name ended up on spam lists, that's because all of those webmasters have no idea why these profiles are being created.

If I ran a forum and knew nothing about SEO then I would also assume that anyone signing up and leaving links in their profile has the intentions of starting threads and spamming my forum. However, this is simply not the case.

That is BS... you're making up excuses now. Most of those webmasters are not idiots and they know what is happening. Some care while others don't.

In fact, when I create a profile, my intentions are the exact opposite of a spammer. An ideal situation for me is that NOBODY sees my profile. I don't want any human eyes on my profiles.

So long as I'm not breaking any laws or sabotaging anyones business, I'll go after links in just about any means possible.

I agree with you on both of these points.

[Pat Jackson]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

what is the difference between creating a profile or leaving a comment with a link to a viagra site or a movie poster site? It's the same thing. Why is that real spam but links to Florida vacation homes aren't?

Links to Florida vacation homes can be spam, if the comment is commercial. Again, "Click here to read more about Florida vacation homes" is spam.

"good post" with your name hyperlinked to your Florida vacation homes site, is not.

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

That is BS... you're making up excuses now. Most of those webmasters are not idiots and they know what is happening. Some care while others don't.

I never said they were idiots. It's fair to assume that a large amount of these webmasters have no idea about SEO. Particularly in very small niche related forums.

Some may know what is happening, but many do not. Just about every forum has people registering with links in their signature and then spamming the **** out of the forum through posting replies to threads and starting new threads.

Now, because of this, any time anyone signs up to their forum with a link in their signature that isn't related to the sites content, they are obviously going to assume that it's just another spammer there to make their life a misery, and you can't blame them for that.

Many of these forum owners do not understand our intentions. If they did I'm sure many of them would still delete profiles, however, many of them wouldn't.

[jasonmorgan]

oh well, we will just have to agree to disagree

no more fun discussions on the ethics of SEO for me today.

I need to get my chinese sweat-shop knocking out 300 new profiles.

Then run through a scrapebox list and hit up the high PR pages that have captchas.

It's all work and no play.

[dwatrous]

After reading through the stuff that Pat and Jason posted, I just have to say that whether you call it spam or not, there are some things that just work out to be inconsiderate.

Pat compares forum profiles to articles, but IT'S SO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. In the first place, the article site is a public forum. They built it for people to publish content and have in mind that you'll leave links in the resource box. That's what they give you in exchange for the content. There's a value exchange. You add content to their site and you get a link back

When someone sets up a forum for a topic of their choosing, that's a much different thing. They want it to be a vehicle for discussion. If you go in and take some links and try to "fly under the radar" as in Terry's thread, there is no value exchange. You provide nothing to them, but you do try to take value from them.

I don't care if you want to call it spam or something else. I'm not hung up on the term, but most people refer to spam as unwanted commercial messaging. On an article website, or a press release site, or other public forum, the value exchange has been established and is understood. For a forum or a blog, it's a bit different. If you're not willing to give any value back, you shouldn't sneakily take any from them.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

gotcha

I'm not trashing these methods. I use them everyday and other devious methods.

LOL. So you call it unethical and immoral but you are doing it? Whose worse those that have a difference of opinion or you who believes its unethical but still does it?

While these methods may not technically be 'spam', that doesn't mean they are right....... Not technically spam, but we don't have a better term for this yet.

Well look heres the deal both you and dwatrous clearly want to stick your head in the sand and make blanket across the board statements. You can argue spam until the cows comes home. If I ask someone to email me and they do - or if I subscribe and they email me - I can cry about it but it won' t make it spam.

Now you have a point with sites the do NOT want you to place business links but what you both want to do is pigeon whole ALL of profile backlinking into your square peg.

You ignore or are ignorant of the fact that some sites ask for your website and ask for your company name and flat out CREATE the backlink for you through their own software. Some give you POINTS for doing so..

You ignore or are ignorant of the fact that MANY sites allow you blogs, articles and "about me" sections that give you ALL the facilities of article directories going way beyond the forum profile that dwatrous seems intent on sticking to. MANY "about me" sections come with web editors specifically including link options in that section.

You ignore or are ignorant of the fact that even moderated sites allow backlinks. Thats right I get approved routinely for leaving my links because I leave enough for the admin to see I respect his/her site. ALl moderated sites ? Of course not. but it underlines a key point that discussions like this always brings up -

You do not speak for all webmasters you only think you do. Many sites have no problem whatsoever with the links in fact some companies even want raw numbers for financing and crdibility issues.

Bottom line if a site tells people they can leave their link on their site and someone does then whine, cry foul moralize all you want - It isn't Spam as long as you are operating under the rules of the board.

Now having said all that I will say one thing. If you are using a completely automated system and especially one that is breaking a site's Captcha then sorry - you ARE spamming. Your automated system has no chance of being a participating member and you don't even know where you have left your links you've just fed it into a program.

The very fact that you are using a program or service to break a Captcha is violating the sites rules

It's a loophole in the system that is being abused for our own purposes... to boost our sites so we make money.

Rarely is it a loophole. I dont' expect you to think like a programmer but features have to be coded in. the coding of a profile section is not a loophole its deliberate and lets use forums as an example and we'll see that the programmers again program the option to turn off features or limit who can use them.

The same goes for blog commenting and automation. Anybody who thinks that using an automation tool to leave generic comments on thousands of blogs for the sole purpose of creating backlinks is not

Totally agree on that which is why I do not believe in and do not incorporate a totally automated system but decided the benefits of human participation on the sites I find outweigh the minute or two it takes to fillout a profile with my semi automated system (the idea being that if you have more time to participate it encourages it). Total automation is spam.

Profiles wouldn't be deleted when they are caught.

All assuming that they are deleted which they are not. IN the case of Angela's links Webmastes are really responding ot the volume that hits their sites in a short time. As for who reports what as soam - People get reported for spamming even from people who subscribed to their list. That whole paragraph makes no point.

[rockstar99]

Good backlinks are generated by GOOD CONTENT. Whether its yours or someone elses. It all depends on your definition of spamming i guess.

[one800pools]

Let's be real in our thoughts and assumptions of what is black, gray, white hat or spam when it comes to link building really is. IMHO there is really no such thing as white hat link building as natural back linking really entails building sites with quality content and over time other sites wanting to link to you. That's how I think the big SE sees that. Spamming is when no type of contribution is given.

I was around and build my first websites back in 1996. Then it was easier as stated here in this thread as you could basically submit your website to search engine directories, get listed and be towards the top of the serps. When I started back then, there were only 33,000 commercial sites, period. And at that time it was way easy to get links from other big sites. We did it many times.. I was in auto parts industry at that time and I got a link from Ford.

And lets face it, we are all self promoters and salesman, and we have to be right? We are in business for ourselves and have to make profit to survive. We all leave links in our signatures here, but most of us also contribute.

In that respect, I don't find it wrong to submit articles with a resource box linked back to you, if you make some kind of contribution to what topic you are writing about.

Bookmark sites are all about bookmarking pages you like, yours or not. They were designed to socially share websites, right. Sharing articles, news stories, products or services someone may like. Nailing one 24 hours a day with every page of your site is too much and not right IMO, but bookmarking some of the category pages to share is not.

What were website directories created for? To bookmark your website for someone else's reference. I have submitted my site to many web directories as I feel they are the yellow pages of the internet.

Forum and blog comment links.. same thoughts here.. its OK to leave your link as long as you can contribute something. Some people contribute more than others, but I think the important point is to just contribute.

Just a few of my thoughts....

[dwatrous]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You ignore or are ignorant of the fact that some sites ask for your website and ask for your company name and flat out CREATE the backlink for you through their own software. Some give you POINTS for doing so..

I'm sure I'm ignorant to a great many things. But you might have missed that in my last comment I flat out say that some sites are designed to give you backlinks. If you go back and read that again you'll see I talk about the value exchange.

I had to police a forum from people that left viagra, porn and all types of other nasty links in profiles and elsewhere on my forum. It was a G rated fitness forum. Whatever you call it, it's inconsiderate.

Oh well. Who cares right? We might just have to agree to disagree.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by dwatrous

I'm sure I'm ignorant to a great many things. But you might have missed that in my last comment I flat out say that some sites are designed to give you backlinks. If you go back and read that again you'll see I talk about the value exchange.

I saw that but then I see you go right back to making blanket claims again.

I had to police a forum from people that left viagra, porn and all types of other nasty links in profiles and elsewhere on my forum. It was a G rated fitness forum.

No you didn't have to police it you just needed to create a forum that dictated your wishes. Most of the major forums software allows you to set conditions for leaving signatures, opening profiles etc. Sorry but some forum web masters are just lazy and their laziness sends a mixed message to spammers. Don't want indiscriminate profile links then close that feature or set it up to be viewable only when people login, or only for people with a certain amount of posts. Honestly the only reason a forum admin needs to cry foul is when the link is left in an actual post (and a post that has nothing to do with a forum is spam) not a forum profile link because the admin if he is using even basic forum software should have control of the profile section and how it operates. I see too much whining about this that is unnecessary if the forum admin uses common sense and half decent forum software.

Whatever you call it, it's inconsiderate.

Why woud I call it anything? I don't do viagra and porn and I will boot people out of my service for those things. I don't take issue with some of your objections . I take exception to your blanket statements and blanket implication on what everyone is doing and how they are doing it in what you identify as blanket link spam. I know thats false because I work with sites almost every day that alllow for backlinks and are programmed for leaving backlinks by the owners.

[jasonmorgan]

really.... c'mon... this is not what the programmers or the site owners intended...

terrykyle97 - VIBE Rap Battle Member

View Profile: bobbymington - Agile Web Solutions Support Forums

http://expressionengine.com/forums/member/146507/

I think inconsiderate might be a good word for this and these are mild examples. The people who I used as examples have profiles that are loaded with up tp 20+ links on them like they are personal little link farms.

LOL. So you call it unethical and immoral but you are doing it? Whose worse those that have a difference of opinion or you who believes its unethical but still does it?

I just don't piss on a webmaster and tell him it's raining.

Of course, those who are selling these backlinks and services don't want others to think they aren't perfectly legit white hat means of developing backlinks. How about we email the webmasters of the sites where you are leaving your links and ask them how they feel... I believe most TOS's also state to not leave commercial links n' such.

The truth is, when you use these methods you are showing that you have absolutely no consideration or care at all for that website... you're just doing a drive by link bombing in order to make a buck.

Is doing this the worst thing in the world... no, it's not that big of a deal and in most cases doesn't do any damage and is under the radar... that still doesn't mean the baby jesus would give you a thumbs up.

Why woud I call it anything? I don't do viagra and porn and I will boot people out of my service for those things.

why would content make a difference?

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

I believe most TOS's also state to not leave commercial links n' such.

The vast majority of the sites on the standard platforms actually do not state any such restriction.

Tom

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

really.... c'mon... this is not what the programmers or the site owners intended...

terrykyle97 - VIBE Rap Battle Member

View Profile: bobbymington - Agile Web Solutions Support Forums

http://expressionengine.com/forums/member/146507/

And what exactly does that have to do with whether a site owner wants any links left at all? Could you go to a blog platforrn and see some guy post 10,000 pictures on one blog post and then conclude that blogging is violating the intent of the site owner? Thats an extreme and would get you tossed out of my program and almost all the people who facilitate profile backlinking recommend against abuse. The extreme doesn't make a rule.

I think inconsiderate might be a good word for this and these are mild examples. The people who I used as examples have profiles that are loaded with up tp 20+ links on them like they are personal little link farms.

Again. So what? How does someone abusing a site mean that it is automatically spam to post two links instead of twenty?

I just don't piss on a webmaster and tell him it's raining.

How about if you consider it pissing not doing it at all?

Of course, those who are selling these backlinks and services don't want others to think they aren't perfectly legit white hat means of developing backlinks. How about we email the webmasters of the sites where you are leaving your links and ask them how they feel

LOL! this is priceless. You have admitted to using backlinks that you consider as spamming and now you want to critique me because I help people to find suitable sites to do exactly what you do? Pot meet kettle.

Why don't you email allen and explain to him what being an anti member of Warriors means (your tag line) and if he is comfortable with it? Again a wide range of the sites I leave links with have specific linking features including "your company" and website url fields or editors that program the links in as an option. As tom has pointed out most sites have no TOS against it and that precisely because with participation many sites have nothing against it.

... I believe most TOS's also state to not leave commercial links n' such.

You believe? You are critiquing others and you don't even know?

The truth is, when you use these methods you are showing that you have absolutely no consideration or care at all for that website... you're just doing a drive by link bombing in order to make a buck.

Hey if thats what you do then I get why you think others do but as matter of fact i 've found a number of interesting sites doing what I do and theres one right now that has a paid option I never knew existed and soon will sign up for. In other words they are getting a paying customer from a guy that you allege "cares nothing about their site" and wants nothing else to do with the site. Another real estate site has become my favorite for looking up foreclosed properties. Theres a parenting sight that as a parent I will be checking out and a cms that I want to use in the future. I could go on and on.

that still doesn't mean the baby jesus would give you a thumbs up.

why would content make a difference?

Baby Jesus would know the answer to that - because thats what most of the sites I am talking about want. I'm fine with baby Jesus. He later said render unto caesar what is caeser's and these sites say give me your participation and fill out your profile and you can put a link and I render to them as they said they want and take the backlink that they say I can have.

The same baby Jesus' book in proverbs says that you should never answer an issue before you've heard it. You blindly critique all backlink sellers and users and you don't even have a clue that I am at this very time testing a system using backlink profile sites as article directory sites . In other words as another form of content syndication PRECISELY as how these sites SPECIFICALLY tell us they want their site to be used.