[DELETED]

[DELETED]

[DELETED]

I am following that link now!

I wonder how many proxies he smoked through to do 1M blast! This is fascinating. Hopefully big G will see the environment they've created.

It's news. The story shatters some myths regarding Negative SEO.

You see rand hopping in the mix?... lol... the truth is probably that despite the widespread penalties, it is going to be hard to effectively execute negative seo... this is primarily because its likely the case that the negative impact of a penalty is proportionate to the possitive impact the activity initially had.

Take bmr for example... i know that i got years of positive juice from its use... so applying a penalty would make sense. Why would someone increase my rankings for me for months or years with the hopes that eventually it would backfire?

It has always been the case that large link blasts on other sites would make them drop like a rock for a couple of days. What has yet to be proven is whether or not a longer lasting penalty like many bmr users are suffering can be intentionally caused without the offending activity first providing long term benefits.

Its my hunch this is googles formula. Only when an acivity is beneficial to a sites rank for a long period will it incur a longer penalty when identified. By further limiting the penalty to being keyword/page specific... Google makes virtually impossible to hurt another site without first helping them tremendously.

Love Dan and Rand finding jesus a little though. This thread is seo drama as a high art.

People at TP are going crazy over this.
Google have created a huge mess with this "Unnatural Links" penalty.
And the moment average joe know about it, it will be mayhem and going to get ugly.

Its helpful to all.. nice one good.

wild right?

Google is in a huge mess right now... HUGE MESS.

I read it and I'm worried. Scary...

Why does Google penalize for spam links? They should just ignore them instead. Anyone could be attacked at any time.

IMO, the whole thing is a publicity spamfest! :rolleyes:

Stop looking at what you want to be wrong & look at what's happening, he is driving lots of traffic from the drama.

There are little girls pooing their pants because neg seo might be a possibility. Those of us that have been following along don't have a lot to worry about. I don't expect Dan Thies will have a problem a month from now.

Negative SEO is the just a bad decision but I doubt Google will man up and own up to it.

While we destroy each-other the large companies with big resources will benefit greatly which is exactly what google wants.

As I keep reading this thread the section where dan thies pops up and comments is epic this is a great read.

Posts and discussions like the following just illustrate the type of storm we have brewing it seems...

Google the following for an example: "[METHOD] Illuminati Link Domination Strategy"

Or this Google search:

"Successful Negative SEO Case Study - Main Backlinks/SEO Discussion - Traffic Planet"

AdWords advertisers can ofcourse use their account reps for "sway" in this regard as well, reporting sites they might find minor issues with etc this can be heavily abused certain ways...

301 redirects can be used to funnel "spammy" linkjuice and force subsequent link loss in all kinds of devious ways as well...

Many, many options out there for people that don't necessarily include just blasting crappy links, reporting their competitors for linkbuilding, etc...

It is hilarious to see so many people's public attitudes towards this topic rapidly take a 180...

Variations/combos/tweaks of all these types of approaches would lead to interesting SERP results you'd think...

IMO stuff like the above is just the tip of the iceburg in terms of negative SEO posssibilites out there and probably heavily in action today. This does not paint a pretty outlook for the overall SERP environment when it comes to "typical" websites out there and "typical" webmasters... YIKES

But I 100% agree with yukon about spending your time doing something productive. It is just a shame that this type of ecosystem has been allowed to fester for so long, and now it seems to be at its worst.

Thank you for the share!

Now i m following these links much informative. but there are some sort of questions i want to ask. is it possible.?

I thought this was obvious, isn't this why people have always been saying don't do mass scrapebox blog comments, profile links etc straight to your money sites?

Wonder how long it will take for Google to start de-indexing website that have negative SEO case studies or services.

I could see them "punishing" those who are known to offer negative SEO services.

LOL it sounds like Terminator 5 - Man vs Machines.

It's such a simple concept - there's nothing to prove. I don't get it.

Here:

I have killed loads of my own sites while experimenting/testing/learning SEO. Mostly with links (bad links, lol). I can do the same to your sites - unless your sites are established, well known brands.

I could kill all of my existing sites today. None of them are strong brands - some have quality backlinks, social media profiles, thousands of visits a day, etc but that doesn't make them invincible. In fact it's so easy - I could send all 10 sites from pages 1 to 5/10 with about 2 hours of work. Sitewide. It's ridiculous.

Simple as that. Of course negative SEO is possible.

Ok. negative SEO is precisely as possible as getting a penalty for unnatural links is. Google don't really know or care who built unnatural links, they just penalize the site (and probably get off on doing so, too).

In other words, if negative SEO doesn't work, then 'unnatural link penalties' don't exist either. Well!

Can't have it both ways.

See my point?

To reliably argue that negative seo doesn't work then you have to live in denial about all these so called unnatural link penalties going around.