Why the Value of Massive Spam links is constantly declining in power

by 205 replies
238
I've been buckling down on research and teaching of SEO again and thought I would share a couple of very relevant SEO factors over the next few weeks that can really affect ranking of pages. One question that still comes up is whether massive backlinking works and whether it gets sites penalized.

Theres been enough debates on if that happens directly as a result of massive spam linking but there is another angle that hasn't been discussed often that pretty much guarantees that massive backlinking will eventually lose power across many sites.

Here's how that works

Its a known fact that Google DOES penalize sites that link to spam and that the power of links from those sites deteriorates as a result. You may not be responsible for who links to you but you ARE responsible for who you link to . Sites that don't keep out tools like Xrummer (link spam bot but there are others) eventually get hammered by a good amount of clearly spam links. Google then identifies these links and if the number of spam links reaches an undisclosed level begins to lower the value of the links FOR EVERYONE using that site and the page in the search engine falls.

So the reality is that the more people use these tools the more likely the kind of sites that allow them will have less and less power for everyone else linking from that site . Thats why you may not see any big changes in the algorithm from Google. Eventually the links get less and less power the more over run a site is with spam links. This degrading power is already built into the algorithm.

This is one of the reasons why people who advocate using mass backlinks have to tell you to always keep building links. They don't realize that the more they build (as a group) the less effective the links become.

What can you do? Don't spend your entire SEO link building campaign focusing on the kind of links that are targeted by these mass spam links (forums are the most targeted). For one a lot of the links are removed by the forum masters and then those admins that allow their site to be slammed by spam over and over again will have less and less link authority to give.

Funny thing about it is the spammers are destroying the power of the links they live by and its all designed into the algorithm. Some will object. third party source needed? Fine

Here's a quick cases study from a third party source but its nothing that every real SEO professional doesn't know

Google Page Level Penalty for Comment Spam – Rankings and Traffic Drop

Build your links with balance not just for ease. Avoid alleged SEOs/backlink gurus that don't create balance in links and who are always pushing mass spam links no matter how popular they may be. Long term the strategy is on a deepening downward trend - by design.
#search engine optimization #constantly #declining #links #massive #power #spam
  • Its a good article for power decline with massive backlinks.
  • The goal of all search engines is to provide us all with unique and relevant content. They will continue to pursue this until all B.H. tactics are rendered irrelevant.
    • [1] reply
    • Yup, just like blog comment spam not working, which has been around for how long:rolleyes: None of these link building techniques are new. Xrumer wasn't created last month.
  • Something is just not right with this.

    Take a look at the top 4 listings for the keyword "before", and then look at the top 4 listings for the keyword "after".

    What do you notice? NONE of the top 4 results are the same.

    Not one single listing. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

    It seems to me that perhaps Google underwent one of its infamous short-term Google ranking shuffles. I'm sure you've seen it, where all of the listings get shuffled around for a bit, and then come back to the way they were?

    You would think the #1 listing (which even had 2 listings on page 1 and appears to be the main virtualbox site) could manage to be in the top 4 a couple of weeks later. Again, one possible reason is simply a short-term shakeup by Google of ALL the listings.

    Now, of course, we both know that outgoing links can potentially hurt the power of a domain, although (1) I don't think it is as easy as saying when a site gets X % or X number of outgoing bad links or whatever from a domain then it will get penalized or devalued (at least when we are talking about authority domains, and (2) i'm not sure if this really is a good example of this case.

    Actually, that should be the standard advice for ALL types of backlinks. Backlinking should be a continual process for any page you wish to rank in Google. SEO 101 here.

    Tom
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • [DELETED]
    • You are right Tom, backlinking is a continual process. Quick pumps/shots of backlinks are OBVIOUS to Google and they WILL shot any domain that are found guilty of doing so.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • I agree with the premise that sites that are essentially "free for alls" when it comes to linking will suffer in some way over time. I've seen several FFA .edu sites have their outgoing links totally devalued while the domain PR and ranking remains intact.

    This doesn't mean that all comment and profile links are bad. With proper use they can still be quite potent. On the flip side, mass automated backlinks from known unmoderated sites probably won't be counted or at least not counted long.

    I think Google grabs the low lying fruit here. All they have to do is buy those popular "link packets" and such incognito to get a list of FFA sites and devalue their link juice and put them in the visual inspection queue. They don't even have to search them out via special algorithms, they just follow the money, so to speak.
    • [1] reply
    • Not helping does not mean hurting.

      I'd like to see the google algorithm that declares a blog reply
      as spam, and rates another one as not spam.

      Not liking blog comments overall is one thing. That I do think they
      are going to. They tried the nofollow. People abused that and used
      it in very inappropriate places.

      Too many people look at backlinks, spam or not, and come to some
      perception that google raises or lowers a site's SERPS on those links.
      I don't think you can ever make that assumption. There are so many
      other intangibles that go into the mix of why a site is #1 or #500.

      As I said, I "kinda" agree with the premise that blog comments,
      as far as helping rankings, are going the way of the 8-track.

      Do I do them? You betcha!

      Paul
  • Back to the first, initial topic for a minute

    I read an article on Google's Webmasters Blog...I'll come back and post a link in a minute...just have to find it.

    They say, almost to a T, "There is almost nothing any webmaster can do, to harm another Webmaster's ranking in Google's search engine."

    Key word there, 'almost'.

    An incoming link to your site, will not devalue your site in any way. Worst case scenario, it just doesn't count for anything.

    Google did this because at one point, 1 webmaster could just build a bunch of spam links to their competitors and wipe them off the first page.

    Now, as mentioned on their official blog, EXTERNAL LINKS from your site, to a 'spam' site or site that violates Google's content guidelines, will devalue your site.

    So, notice before, how they said 'almost'...

    When you end up with a 'spammy' link pointing from your site, that can in fact devalue your site and rankings.

    So, when a site gets consistently bombarded with spammish, irrelevant backlinks, that site becomes devalued.

    Since that website becomes devalued, the outgoing links are also devalued.

    Therefore, following massive spam patterns using bots and otherwise, will decrease in value now, and the backlinking you've done in the past will also become devalued thus lowering your rankings.

    I have to go find those blog posts on the Google Webmasters Blogspot blog.
    • [1] reply
    • [DELETED]
    • There has been a lot of debate on the use of the word "almost" in that referenced blog post.

      A lot of people, including myself, feel that in fact they were the word "almost" as a means of being an agnostic on the issue, as a competitor could, for instance, hack into your site, and install malware for instance. In such a circumstance, a competitor could actually hurt your site. Of course, such a circumstance is so far off the radar for most people and website owners that they need not be concerned with it. But, by using the word "almost" Google is in essence issuing a CYA for these freaky instances.



      • [1] reply
  • HIGH QUALITY CONTENT BEATS ANYTHING IN THE LONG RUN!!!!!!!!
    • [1] reply
  • Why there are still using massive spam links, Is there anything that will benefits on this. Search Engine like google doesn't like this its more likely to deliver unique and quality content.
  • i am not a seo's backside and do not make out i am one , but i do manage a forum for a mate who is slammed by these pest driven paid forum posters constantly.

    It is a relentless task cleaning up their rubbish, / can i ask you write those who allow this / how or what ways are there to prevent these and new spammers coming back ? it is not that we allow them / they just seem to breed like rabbits.

    That with also looking to start my own forum shortly what recommendations do people have to curb these clowns or is it a daily struggle and from reading what you said is it correct even if you keep cleaning these clowns / posts out your still penalized ?

    Appreciate any advice you may be able to share on the topic / one way i thought was paid membership before allowing a Sig link to cut the crap but i am unsure if vb allows that function ?

    Pete
    • [1] reply
    • [DELETED]
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • It all depends on what you want to do with your forum. Do you want your members to be able to have backlinks in their signatures? If so, you can set it up so that only after a certain amount of posts they are allowed to include links in their signature. If you don't mind taking signature links away from everyone, then just don't allow users to put links in their sig at all. People actively interested in your forum won't mind. For example, I don't have any links in my sig here. I come here solely to learn and teach what I can.

      Another thing you can do to prevent a lot of it is to make forum members profile pages not publicly viewable. As an example, our Warriorforum profile found here is publicly viewable, meaning everyone including search engine spiders can see it. If you make member profiles private then spiders won't be able to see it, making it useless for people to put links in.

      If you're having trouble with people making posts for their backlinks, you can institute the idea above. Make users have at least 50 posts before they are able to include links in their sig. It won't stop everyone, but I'd say at least 99% of people won't even bother if they have to make 50 posts to get links in their sigs.

      Also, if you've got a really healthy forum, like this one, people will do a lot of your job for you by using the report function on spam posts.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Google Bowling has never happened in the past.

    Sites have never been removed from the Google index before, either.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [2] replies
    • I have no interest in reading or responding to any of Mike's bull**** but I wanted to back up Tom and say that I was the one who received the PM from Allen himself stating that backlinking products are allowed again.

      As Tom suggested, I wouldn't imagine there to be an announcement about it at all, but to my knowledge they are fair game again and I will be starting some WSO's in the near future that wouldn't have been allowed previously.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • I think that Google takes the low fruit here. All of them are their only link to buy a popular packages, and that undercover for a list of FFA sites and devalue the link juice, and put them in a visual array. They do not even need to search for them using special algorithms that just follow the money, so to speak.
      • [1] reply
  • It is a hard thing to get an accurate idea of - whether a spammed powerful site becomes less powerful due to it becoming a bad link neighbourhood. The problem is that people who spam the links are constantly spamming so as one site slowly fades away, the dozens or even hundreds of fresh links are still giving the target an upwards push.

    You can really only tell after leaving a page sit for a while without the fresh links and see if it falls down the SERPs.

    Link directories don't work like they use to and guest books are almost a waste of time. These both use to work really well for getting links but their power has faded. They were abused but is that the reason they are no longer that great?

    3 steps foward, and 2 steps back still keeps you heading in the right direction - it just isn't neccessarily the most efficient way to 'move'.
  • SPAM, it's not just for breakfast anymore.
  • Just so the entire bit o tripe is here in its entirety for future ref.
    • [1] reply
    • [DELETED]
    • LOL. Why wouldn't it be? You are freaking hilarious. No I will revise that - ROFL. I give you that. You come up with nothing to rebut the overwhelming evidence but think I would want to change it. You made my night man . Thats some funny stuff right there.

      Incidentally where in the world do you guys learn your SEO? Forget me. Seriously anyone that follows you guys because you can run a bot over respected research sources like SEOmoz needs their heads examined.
  • Mike,

    What is your point? the above quote - or the title of your thread and this phrase?

    Please explain then why Warrior forum and Backlinks forum are NOT De - Indexed

    The same links in the sigs and profiles here, are whats being posted on the other forums you claim are being killed.


    Interesting position that my several posts of multiple paragraphs are "scurrying away" like an ant - its just a little hard to respond to which "angle" - context - or REAL SEO [ LOL ] you wish to migrate to yourself - when you dont quite get the responses you desire.

    You posted a theory, and used a very odd blog post as a "case study" when it was nothing more than a voodoo ... this happened once to me for 24 hrs .... so it is a new SEO Law - anecdotal story. Sorry - that blog post source is just not a valid article proving anything to anyone ...but you.
  • Oh Mike. A lot of us remember that a few months ago you were selling "unique" links with a roboform submitter etc on one of your sites. You were peddling profile links.

    Now you appear to have re-invented yourself as a "real seo" and everyone else is wrong, again.

    If the value of user-generated links is diminishing, perhaps you could explain this blog post from Rand over at SEOMoz from August:

    SEOmoz | I'm Getting More Worried about the Effectiveness of Webspam

    I especially like this quote as an example:

    "On nearly every commercially lucrative search results I pull up these days, I see bad links pushing bad sites into the top rankings at Google."



    Now I would class him as knowing a bit more than most people about SEO (unless you disagree?).
    • [1] reply
    • Jazbo don't be so patently dishonest. You were in many debates I had WHILE I was selling a profile link package and you know perfectly well I was against MASS spam bots from then particularly ones that broke Captcha. You were right there with this same crew complaining against my position. Just like I have said often in this thread I said then - moderation. Anyone can go though my posts and see me making arguments against mass bots even then. You might disagree with my position but honesty should not have to suffer. Your re-invent nonsense is a plain lie.

      Profile links are a way for young sites to get links, traffic and then noticed. I'm all for it in moderation but I am for building real businesses with return traffic and that have something people want to link to. Going forward when people get trained by you guys in the ways of mass bots they can't really say they have any security. If you rank on running a bot so can the next guy. It takes no skill. Quite a few of you know this as well. thats why you can see you buying links, domains with PR and other things. To the credit of some you have begun to teach your customers more than profile links but some of you have nothing else to offer. When i teach I try to teach people ALL about link building not over emphasized easy, played out no skill solution for everything. Part of that process is showing people the downside of one or another approach which I will continue to do despite your protests.

      You're confusing the point. The OP had nothing to do with how well the site receiving the links does it was about what it does to the site that links out not in. Try again - this time by reading the OP. I've already quoted Rand 's studies on the premise of the OP. His research confirms it so you are stuck. Just not reading the thread is all.

      Pure distortion. I never took a pop at Tom. Dennis took a pop at me and I said many sellers stopped frequenting Warriors. I referenced Tom as agreeing that many had stopped or reduced their posting.

      All your other points in this thread are off since you obviously haven't read whats in it but are just intent on distortion. Anecdotal nonsense about what Wicked Fire forum posters say against respected research companies? Thats pathetic and worse no one is talking about the benefit to the spammers. Its the detriment of the spammed that the OP is about and the overall trend of that site losing link juice in individual links.

      Constantly off point.

      Look it may be shocking to your group but there are people who want to build businesses by showing respect to sites and not being on lists all over the internet of being captcha breaking spammers. None of you could do SEO for real companies with your tactics and you can't compete in any niche where real businesses are truly competitive. Thats a fact and that says it all.
      • [1] reply
  • Another point that counters this. If you read some of the better dark hat forums, you will read some pretty knowledgeable people TRYING to get sites sandboxed as experiments.

    I have read about people throwing thousands of xrumer, senuke and scrapebox links at new domains full of spun content and guess what - the sites still rank.

    I also read about experiments to knock competitors down with the same experiments. And guess what, those competitors in every single case study I have seen COME BACK STRONGER.

    Sorry but the premise of this thread it completely based on general theory that in reality is not true.
  • The search engines are picking up on massive links in a very short time, and when folks start to see their sites plummet in the search rankings they will realise doing that is the reason
  • So tell me Mike,

    Where do these superior SEO,s and "proper businesses" get there links from?

    Are you saying that we can only be serious and thus try and make some dollars if we are lucky enough to be in a position to pay top dollar for a serious and superior SEO?

    There are plenty big business out there who pay for links, this isnt your holy white hat seo that you are talking about.... is it?
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Partnerships (formal and otherwise). Sure really big companies get it from advertising but many small businesses develop partnerships/relationships that make their customers link to them and other related businesses.

      Nope. I advocate using the links at your disposal to start out with including profile links. I just don't advise on running the sites over because

      A) Its not very nice of you and karma is a stinger
      B and more importantly) when you get into the mass run em over mentality you lose out in the long run.

      By the way great timing to answer both points raised. I just a few minutes ago got an email from a site. It was to inform me they were giving me a PR 4 link. Know why I got the opportunity? I didn't run the guys site over. I abided by his rules. I acted as a partner to what he was doing and trying to achieve. I've been on blogs where in a few minutes you could determine whether the owner/blogger is reasonable. Instead of trying to spam him and get my links deleted I joined in and struck up a relationship with him. I could do that because a bot wasn't doing everything. I saw the site and knew the opportunity that a bot wouldn't see. I got a link thats a nice addition to a link portfolio you could reverse engineer all you want you can't duplicate.

      I don't care what the niche is except it was something I/my customer had an interest in (in this case it will be relevant) because I didn't have to fake interest in a way that people can see through as spam attempts. as to how an unrelated wrong/neutral anchor text link can still be used effectively? Figure it out

      Works for forums too. I've build relationships with admins too. You can go ahead and spam them on your N/A profile page. that might help a bit but meanwhile I can post out in the open in a thread that has PR. I make sure its relevant and i don't abuse it. Look at warriors. Do you realize how influential Allen and Myers are? Many forum owners could send piles of traffic and sales to your site by recommendation but they won;t if you spam them. Again if a bot was doing everything I wouldnt see the opportunities. I can still use profile links AND I can get links on pages WITH actual PR because I am not setting a bot and walking away for hours at a time.

      Answer your own question because it seems pointed like you think you know the answer. I don't know anyone that considers buying links as White Hat as you are fully aware since you've been in these debates before. You can spit on white hat all you want. I believe in balance and not running over sites. I do things that some wouldn't call white hat but my commitment has never been to stay in a label but to respect peoples property and benefit from the relationships that builds.

      If an owner tells me he has a link spot and he wants me to pay for it I consider it. Its his site and his property. Do I rely on that kind of thing? No but I'll take it whether someone calls it white hat or black. I'm not violating the site.

      So often white hat is just black hat with common sense and respect. Broaden your horizons instead of having a knee jerk reaction to everything that isn't black hat/Spam.
      • [2] replies
  • Mike,

    I pretty much use blogs like you have stated, creating thoughtfull coments that add to the debate and also using forums just like you. I also pay outsourcers to create spam profile links too, so you can see I,m not averse to either method.

    The problem is though, you yourself have just stated you will use forum profiles to get a site going, this is no different to what you are arguing against ... even if you only left a link on ten of those forums .. is this not spam?
    • [1] reply
    • Where in the Op did I state to avoid all definition that people have for spam? Point it out to me. I could have sworn it was about hammering sites with bots not a post about all things that people consider spam.

      I don't agree that all profile/forum links are spam. So the problem is yours not mine. I've seen too many forums where its quite allowed - including the one you are on right now (as long as its in your sig.). Are you arguing that signature links here are spam?

      Angela had a great post about a year ago of what she considered abuse. Even though the site allowed backlinks she showed a screenshot of someone who had left like fifty or so backlinks on a profile page.

      Point is just because a site is good enough to let you leave a link doesn't mean that you have to abuse it, circumvent their rules, break their captchas and send bots to post links. or leave so many links it degrades their site.

      If a site allows you to leave a link or two and you use it to drop a thousand its abuse and closer to the point if a site says hey we'll allow you a link but just fill out the captcha as a real person looking and interacting with our site its still abuse not to do it just to leave your link.

      the whole - you leave a link while showing respect for the sites wishes so it gives me the right to leave a link while not abiding by the sites wishes - is a lame excuse. Not saying you are necessarily saying so but watch if you don't see people seizing upon that old and tired argument as a justification for mass bot link spamming.
  • Same question again Mike,

    How is your link NOT spam?

    I think everyone would agree that leaving 50 links IS spam, how do you police that? No one can be accountable for everybody yet you are trying to differentiate by saying your links are ok but everyone else,s are garbage.

    Your link isnt surrounded by some magical halo, what makes you think YOUR link is so special and anyone else's isnt worthy?

    Made by software or not, its still a link.
    • [1] reply
    • You got your answer. Now you try answering before demanding more then I'll answer again if you didn't get it.

      Do you consider signature links here spam even though they are clearly allowed for?
      • [1] reply
  • It makes not one slightest bit of difference how you try to dress it up Mike.

    You sold software that enabled people to leave profile links in forums and you profited from that, yet you are here now condeming nasty evil software users as killing the link.

    Here's a profound message, the software doesnt kill the link, the user might derail some efforts but who can control what the user does?

    The world is moving on and you with your rants aint going to stop that, just like me whinging about yet more job cuts aint going to do nothing but get myself all wound up.

    Adapt.
  • I dont wish to keep getting on your case Mike but if anyone has been boxed in a corner here it is you Im afraid.

    Let me just say "Double standards" when it suits your agenda, whatever that may be.

    Afterall, selling a profile bot and then admitting to creating profile links and then purposefully creating a thread deliberately to antagonize anyone using profile links ... need I go on.

    Infact, Im off to the backlinks forum, cant listen to this crap any longer.
    • [1] reply
    • please do take that lying to another forum where it will be taken with open arms. I never sold a bot. thats your invention. plus I never antagonized ANYONE using profile backlinks. in fact my OP never named any names. 33% right is a failing grade in any subject.
  • Okays Guys . Its been Fun. Almost like old times

    Nothing new seems to be on the table . Look forward to interacting with you many times in the near future.
  • ROFL,

    Ok, you just confirmided you didnt read anything previously posted.

    I use forum profiles to get a initial boost: check.
    I use blog comments, some outsourced: check.
    I use forums and make contributions: check.
    I use blog comments and can spend upto 1/2 hour writing those comments: check.
    I use other networks too.

    Sure, the forum I participate in allows linking products, this in no way means that is all is advocated there and if you did your research correct you would know this.

    Only shows you are on a crusade of some sorts, god knows why ... maybe just bored ??







    Still doesnt answer your double standards though ... does it !!
    • [3] replies
    • YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
      Is this a 5 minute argument or the full half hour.
      • [ 2 ] Thanks
    • Funny you should ask. I became bored half way through that last post of yours. At least when you were lying about me selling a bot it was more interesting . Now your just rambling making no point at all. have a good night man. See you soon.
    • Just like warriorforum and w!ckedfire (which incidentally is at the top of google for a lot of IM and IM forum related keywords..had to add the "!" cuz it is a banned keyword here I believe), i might add. Seems like a bit of a crusade to me. Hell, lots of the best products started at w!ckedfire. See: http://www.wicked fire.com/links-seo/ (space added so the keyword police won't nab it). 6 ads with Xrumer in the title on just page 1. Pretty sweet.
  • Good night Mike,

    You left with no alternative other than to bow down to what was staring you in the face all along.










    You were talking gibberish.
  • Yet another classic

    Mike - ever considered decaf ?
    • [1] reply
    • weak. Terribly weak.

      I can almost predict what the next retort will be
  • Does anyone create mass profile linking or blog comments to their *clients sites, or is it purely for personal use? (*Offline businesses, not other internet marketing clients).
  • Mike Anthony, I said this last year at some point and I'll say it again...

    ...you are the zippin SEO Crusader bar none!!!

    Whatever it is you are eating, you need to start selling it!

    Whatever it is that you are drinking, you need to bottle it up and start marketing it.

    That said, I'm off to schedule some MPRs Massive Profile Runs.

    YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
    Giles, the Crew Chief
    • [1] reply

    • You have some nerve showing your face in here and Not using some military lingo soldier! I thought for sure I would get some and you let me down. and then you drop this civilian video. Shame (I assure you I don't talk so fast but I do like the accent. lol)

      Hey if you must check out KKchoon's product. Thats right if you are going to do it at least do it with someone who knows something. I Like the guy. knows his stuff and doesn't stick his head in the sand like an ostrich and make nonsensical SEO statements like some wannabe SEOs on here. Sure he and you do what I won't but he's not the dishonest kind to tell you you don't have a point when you have one but then he actually knows when you do and they don't.

      Anyway more power to you man. Wish you the best.
  • one of the most enttertaining threads / on all parts.

    for me i am tired of these spammers / i have placed a big red sign at the top telling spammers they are not welcome / ? not that the bots will read that anyway i suppose.

    but my new trick today is i grab one of the spam post (they usually post dozens) and add a great new header on the page telling visitors to the page not to visit the site as they are supporting posting spam on the forum. ( in big red letters ) i then remove the hyper links, lock the post and make it a sticky. (delete the other posts)

    now the fun start where i then get the contact email from the site being spammed and sent them an email with a link to the page / telling them to get a new seo service or to stop spamming.

    i could even think about collecting a paypal payment to remove these clowns when they post back complaining ? for wasting my time ?

    maybe a new way to make money ? who knows but for now, i will see how many scalps i can collect / up to my back teeth with these clowns now.
    • [1] reply
    • I guess I don't follow your thought process after the "now the fun" introduction.

      Why would they/we care? It is just work for you with no added value for you. I should start doing this to all my competitors sites and then you can start emailing them asking for payment It actually seems like a fun way to mess with my competitors. Thanks much. In any event, they were likely looking for the link only, not the pass through traffic from your site. Having the big red sign isn't going to do anything, but have fun with your side business.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
    • Banned
      [DELETED]
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • I`m agree with Tom last comment...
  • Again, I didn't say that. My comments about the shade of your hat weren't even directed to you. They were general statements.

    You're not understanding what I said about forced links. If you go out and create links to promote your site, that's forced link building. Natural links don't happen that way. Can you see the difference between white and grey now?
    • [1] reply
    • If you are clarifying that now I have no problem accepting that but in post 141 you did quote me and responded directly to my quote. thas why I responded but its cool.

      Thats not THE definition of white hat. For example a common white hat tactic is to contact a owner and ask for a link. Thats not natural. You are asking for it. Same goes for commenting If you go to a blog and add legitimate content, place your link and the owner approves it that is clean white hat. In that case you are going out and creating links promoting your site and its still whitehat
  • Great debate guys!
  • Spot on man, I have been thinking that the major search engines will eventually be able to almost completely devalue massive automated link building efforts. I see a lot of scripted spam on blogs and forums and it gets quite annoying.

    I think that in the big picture those websites that have a diverse range of links over time that are clearly not bot generated will stand out from the pack. Lets face it, the search engines are getting smarter and it really isn't hard to detect these spammers.

    A site having hundreds or thousands of links with the same spam text, anchor text, etc, especially within a short period of time should throw up some red flags. vs more unique natural looking links etc
    • [1] reply
    • How long has blog comment spam been around? Probably since the very first blog allowed comments.

      How long has Google known about blog comment spam? Probably since Google started its search engine. (1997)

      Does blog comment spam still work? Yep.

      So, Google has had 13 YEARS to account for it (like you wish they would at least), yet it hasn't. If by "eventually" you mean 2050, perhaps. But, Google seems more interested in teaching its computers how to drive cars around California on autopilot (sidebar: How the hell is that legal?) or coming up with that brilliant:rolleyes: Google Instant.


      Google has never rewarded "natural" link building. They just haven't. Matt can preach whatever he wants about how he would get links, but at the end of the day, doing "unnatural" linking, like for instance using the same anchor text, works wonders. Getting links from "irrelevant" (whatever that means..i'm not sure where you draw the lines) works wonders., etc. In any event, Google won't penalize a site for incoming links as any competitor could simply send whatever links it wanted to, to competitors' sites and be #1 by default. At most, the big G would devalue or not count certain links (see note above on likelihood of that). I've got tons of sites that will happily take your spamming link love.

      In any event, even if Google changes its algo, there will *always* be a way to game Google SERPs.

      Tom
  • Banned
    Tom is right on as usual.

    Popular thoughts from WF doom-and-gloomers lately about backlinking:

    "Social bookmarking no longer works"
    "Blog commenting no longer works"
    "Forum profiles no longer work"
    "Backlinks from non-relevant sources no longer work"
    "Backlinks from PR0 or - sources no longer work"
    "NoFollow doesn't work"
    "Using the same anchor link doesn't work"

    Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. And....wrong.

    But I like how this is becomming the standard thinking for masses of IMers, leaving the rest of us to enjoy these easy backlinks while they toil with time-consuming alternatives.
    • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies
    • Thanks Catherine. Of course, i'm not really sure why I care. I really shouldn't. The more people believe in the myths the less competition I have. It is in my best interests to not fight it as much I guess

      Tom

    • Lol. Yeah right. The "standard thinking of the masses" in Im is that if you push a button on a few bots you will dominate any niche and have ton loads of traffic so whats up Catherine ? Why does the average Imer throw in the towel in a few months because he can't get the traffic? And why do we find people every week who ran a whole ton of profilelinks that can't get to the top three? You are creating a strawman argument that almost no one embodies in this entire forum. No one says all those things don't work. You just made it all up to slant the table.

      What your trainers won't be honest enough to tell you in this thread is you do need backlinks ON high Pr pages going forward and spambots can't give you that. Time consuming alternatives? Not needed? then ask your trainers why they BUY domains that have high PR just so they can put links on High PR PAGES to help them to rank their own sites? No? learn to run a backlink checker on your trainers OWN sites. they openly admit that elsewhere but in this thread they will act like Forum backlinks are all powerful and are not comparatively weak.

      Time to cut the lying and fabrication in this thread and forum coming up with bogus nonsense like you only get backlinks on High pr domains you bought for backup. LOL. what a joke when you know perfectly well that its a "time consuming alternative" (of searching for domains from sellers that hasn't dropped, researching its background , verifying the numbers are real and BUYING the domain ) that has much huger payoffs than amassing a bunch of N/As.

      So sure you can and should start out with links you can get easily but be prepared to do long tail and/or stayout of the way of well established business with plenty of natural backlinks. YOu CANNOT despite the hype of the backlink gurus rank in every niche with just profile links.

      they've had three pages to say - you know what Mike I hate your guts but I got to admit getting on page High Pr backlinks from the site owners that you get is a great thing. Instead they fool people like you Catherine that its a time consuming alternative that will have your competitors leaving the market open for you. Good night this thread is awesome. LOL
  • Put your money where your mouth is Mark.

    I want to rank for the keyword weight loss. I have a brand new site, brand new domain.

    Tell me what to do, exactly, and tell me, based on your PhD-level seo understanding, how long it will take me to do it.

    Thanks,

    Brandi
    • [1] reply
    • Yo Diiig why ask me? You are a major proponent of spam bots. You know the drill. Fire up xrummer and let er rippp!

      or could it be thats your backhanded way of saying that it doesn't work for that term? really strange isn't it? You would think that "Weight loss" would be an IMers dream to rank for. I mean theres got to be hundreds of Imers running xrummer round the clock on that one. but low and behold you can't find anyone ranking high on the first page of google for that term on the power of forum links.

      Pssst

      Lets talk soft so no one can hear. Try this - if you do random searches for all kinds of terms (not the ones in the gurus screenshots) most serps are ranked without relying heavily on profile links but don't tell anyone else in this thread. its just our secret. Apparently for some strange reason they use " time-consuming alternatives" . But wait a minute wasn't doing that supposed to leave the market wide open for you guys?

      So rant about about poor little Mike and tell him how he's full of nonsense. See, enough people are going to agree with you but then when your way doesn't work for their niche and dreams (as is related CONSTANTLY in these forums) they'll say " you know what maybe that guy had a point after all". Mission accomplished not now but then

      Meanwhile Mike A will continue to have and use profile backlinks merrily AND teach his customers the pros AND cons of them and how to use them to move on to bigger and better things instead of thinking of getting on page HIGH PR pages from webmasters as time wasting alternatives to blasting them for N/As. Bad little time wasting boy that he is.
      • [2] replies
  • Why are you so hung up on PageRank? I've seen sites that have a pile of high PR backlinks and they rank lower than sites with a lot less high PR backlinks.
    • [1] reply
    • You haven't seen me even once refer to my sites PR so lets not start another round of your distortions. I'm talking about getting backlinks FROM high PR pages and if you don't know that those are more powerful than zero what can I say?

      Now as to your observation - true - in the serps you will see high Pr pages and pages with HIGH PR backlinks outranked for certain keyword phrases obviously because of relevance. No page can be relevant in all searches but don't get confused by the clap trap you read on these forums (or since you seem to choose to then be confused).

      If a site has the same optimization on page and in incoming anchor text for the same keyword term a high Pr page will outrank a lower one all the time for THAT term and yes PR is the cumulative measurement of the quality of incoming links.
      • [1] reply
  • Yeah, I quoted you, but I could've quoted anyone. It wouldn't make a difference. Nobody said they use white hat tactics, so I randomly chose your post. You understood this, so I don't know why you're bringing it up again.

    As for on-page seo, sure. I can agree with you there.
  • [DELETED]
  • I wonder how google looks at the WF referral links I get from people clicking the link in my signature then? I guess the more clicks I get, WF becomes less and less important? Also, whats the threshold for a link being considered spam? Because I know there are legitimate situations where a site really does backlink a significant amount, and your telling me they are punished because of that? ....smh
    • [1] reply

    • Click throughs in my OP? where? It would have to be the ghost of Wf that typed that there. Nope. Not there. Well bust that pesky ghost some other time though just make sure the streams don't cross. That really ticks Dan, Bill and Harold off.

      I stated the links in general all things being equal would individually lose juice. and yes if sites become known to be link farms there can be penalties. its not just links but where the links go. Go ahead and follow Steve's nonsense that who you link to cannot affect you

      This has nothing to do with what Mike Anthony is saying. Read

      http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66356

      Google Declares Jihad On Blog Link Farms

      SEOmoz | More on Nofollow at SEOmoz and How Bad Outbounds Can Impact Websites

      Want more? google is your friend. Want to believe forum gurus over top research SEO groups and Google? Be my guest. but it has nothing to do with me saying it. its just standard kindergarten SEO.

      Mike smh
      • [2] replies
  • [DELETED]
  • I must have missed the memo where it says that SEOmoz, et al, is the final authority on SEO and everything that comes from the site is completely altruistic and that true professionals are to buy everything SEOmoz says hook, line, and sinker.

    Guess that memo didn't make it through my spam filter

    Warmly,

    Brandi
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • It may or may not, but one cannot argue that xrumer is still effective
  • I really like this thread, it has some good info, but is it possible for some of you to keep it focussed and less personal as we are going off topic. I reckon most of us are just interested in good info and a proper discussion.
    • [2] replies
    • We are certainly interested in good info.

      Hence the dissidence re: OP.
    • There's plenty of good info - sadly it doesnt come from the OP... errrr.... scuze me - His Royal Highness of SEO
  • Today, technology got effective, a little spam is also detected.
    • [1] reply
  • Many people, myself included, believe they have actually had the word almost as a way to be an agnostic on the matter that a competitor could, for example, hack your site and install malicious software such. In such cases, a competitor hurt your site.
  • Mike I have to say, you throw a great party. I love your threads. truly I do, they are like a firework display, one you have carefully planned but that just as it gets underway, some sparks set off all the fireworks and it goes to hell in a handcart.

    Thank you for entertaining us, if adding nothing else of value.

    The bottom line Mike, which everyone can see, is that you re-invented yourself from "unique" link spam seller, to "legit" SEO "guru" and expect people to lap it up like good kittens.

    Sorry, it hasn't worked.

    Perhaps you could try again. How about an automation expert? SENuke, Xrumer, Scrapebox. Set of viedo tutorials and some services could make you a fortune.
    • [1] reply
    • No Jaz your lying hasn't worked and its about to crash and burn . thanks for the opportunity to now prove it after you have insisted on the lie

      http://www.warriorforum.com/adsense-...warrriors.html

      post no 36 - Dated before the ban on links - 03-06-2010, 09:40 PM - and while I was selling and in response to - Shocker! 4referrals (hmm same crew in every thread I rebut spam bots - wonder why)


      I suspect truth still hurts. There in back and white is none other but me opposing spam bots even when I was selling a link package contrary to your lie. I guess because Its IM some people think that everybody will continue to buy from them even when the facts expose them fabricating on an open forum. I wouldn't trust in that though Jaz. People are generally smarter than you think they are. If you can't tell the truth on a forum then why should anyone believe you will tell the truth with anything much less SEO advice or services.

      People see how this works. they are so desperate to squelch any one that criticizes their practice that they can't stay on the facts. Their desperation at being unable to counter the truth has them making up easily provable lies.
      • [2] replies
  • I've always talked about this to my clients who tend to sway to BH techniques. You need a definitely good balance with all links in general. Without a good balance you will never see results longterm. SEO is longterm not shortterm. If you are after shortterm look towards SEM and PPC
    • [1] reply
    • Yes you are of course right about long term and not just short term strategies. the amusing thing is you could post this on any respected SEo forum and it wouldn't raise any fluster. Professional SEOs know all this stuff . You have to go on wicked fire or an IM SEO board to hear people talk such utter nonsense.

      I don't know that I would avoid all BH techniques because that definition is very wide but long term a legit business isn't served by having their corporate identity associated with massive spam to the point where their site is posted on listing for businesses that support spam.
      • [1] reply
  • Nice try but thats you there and it says nothing about whether my advice helped it represents that I never posted anything to help. I called it what it was. I pointed to one example in the sticky and in that thread people said they were helped so you are wrong on every count. If you were even mistaken you now had the opportunity to in fairness change that stand based on the facts that were presented to you. You still decline which has nothing to do with being honest. Sorry Not looking to upset you but my point stands as to the honesty of that statement.

    and how many times do you have to try the same old dishonest technique of claiming I am only white hat when I've said multiple times I don't care about hats. I just won't slam sites mercilessly because they allow me to leave links . I am quite aware that in many circles leaving any link is black or grey hat so you have no point.
  • the case was closed in post 205. thats what has you so enraged. every proof posted gets you angrier and angrier. thats why I said to calm down. You can bust an artery it won't change that none of those sites rank on profile backlinks alone but on high Pr pages.

    You don't know anything about it me nor I you. Your entire animosity stretches back months because of the positions I hold on SEo but they are not going to change and frankly the more you come charging in to try and squelch opposing viewpoints of mine the more I will share those.

    All you have done and will do in future posts is to give them more replies and bumps. haven't you seen that?
    • [1] reply
  • What constitutes spamming?

    Are 300 links ok? How about 450? Are 999 ok, but 1,000 spammy?

    Actually, the defining point of "spam" is "unwanted and unsolicited". By that definition, if permission is not requested prior to placing the link, one link could be spam.

    Food for thought.

    Warmly,

    Brandi
    • [1] reply
    • Agreed so if you do not read the terms of service to even know whether the site you are linking in allows it or not and if you circumvent their captcha which is definitely unwanted then you are a spammer. thanks Digi. you've summarized my point.


      Once however their is no prohibition about leaving the link in the terms and you follow the rules of the site and they present a place for you to leave your link BY PROGRAMMING DESIGN then by your own definition such activities cannot always be considered spam.

      So it has little to do with how many links. You are right. what it has to do with is reading their rules, agreeing to their terms and not breaking their captcha. Your bots cannot do that for you.

      Your definition proves my point.
      • [1] reply
  • Dennis seeing as how your last post contained absolutely nothing to do with the topic but just another one of your typical personal attacks (you have been in multiple similar thread with the same general defense of mass spam) You could have been consistent with your claim that you should not have gotten involved in the thread.

    It would have saved the time you said you needed. Pretend if you like that ample evidence has not been presented. I've yet to see a mass spam bot proponent claim otherwise but appealing to not selling IM product makes no difference to anything in relationship to spam bots. People from all niches do it and if talking about the downsides of it stopped people from making money then people would be far more successfull than the stats before this post indicate they are.

    So your point to the extent there was any is pointless. For my part I see a good bit of politician in your part as well. Most politicians are willing to do whatever suits them and their purposes as well as give no satisfactory answer for their actions - similar to how people ignore the site and site owners that they blast.
  • The objective of all search engines provide us all with unique content and relevant. They will continue to pursue until all the tactics BH irrelevant.
  • Banned
    The objective of all search engines provide us all with unique content and relevant. They will continue to pursue until all the tactics BH irrelevant.
  • Yup, just like blog comment spam not working, None of these link building techniques are new. Xrumer wasn't created last month.
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 238

    Why the Value of Massive Spam links is constantly declining in power

    I've been buckling down on research and teaching of SEO again and thought I would share a couple of very relevant SEO factors over the next few weeks that can really affect ranking of pages. One question that still comes up is whether massive backlinking works and whether it gets sites penalized. Theres been enough debates on if that happens directly as a result of massive spam linking but there is another angle that hasn't been discussed often that pretty much guarantees that massive backlinking will eventually lose power across many sites.