[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Joe118

Angela's service is a way to spam. ES PEE AYE AM. No way around it.

I can find them in Google quite easily, so perhaps Google is also a mechanism for SPAM.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

But I DO check each site. Just because it changes LATER doesn't mean that my "language" is deceptive.

Angela:

You know that I think your packets are great for the segment you're targeting and I think your service is extra cheap. Please don't get me wrong, I never said you were being deceptive. Just suggesting that perhaps there was a lack of clarity.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

Jeremy:

I wasn't aware of the language in the WSO that indicated all 30 were "Do Follow" and since I've now checked, I completely understand your POV that if they all aren't (or at least the vast majority of them aren't) DOFOLLOW then you're not getting exactly what you expected, regardless of the price.

I think Angela is a great person, so I assume that this if the links aren't DOFOLLOW when she sends the packet it is simply an oversight in the language of the WSO and she'll probably correct it.

Once again, 24-48 hours before each new packet comes out, I check each and every site to make sure it works and to make sure it's Do Follow. Some sites will change things later on; that's the nature of the Internet. There is no need to "change" or "correct" the language of my WSO because I DO exactly what I SAY that I do.

This is one thing that takes quite a bit of my time; I have sites in my "master list" that have changed things since I found the sites, even though they are not, nor have they ever been, in the packets. And I'm the only person I know of who got a link from the site. So I have to substitute some of the sites I had chosen previously for the month. Sites change things sometimes. That's the way it is.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

Angela:

You know that I think your packets are great for the segment you're targeting and I think your service is extra cheap. Please don't get me wrong, I never said you were being deceptive. Just suggesting that perhaps there was a lack of clarity.

Yes, I know that, Steve. I just don't know how to make this distinction without having to put a "disclaimer" in. I don't like disclaimers, for the most part. "Negative message" and all...

[djbory]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

We're actually talking about 24 of the sites (which is a LOT more than the 11 in the example) are still working just fine for you. This is the sort of "grumbling" I am talking about. It's perfectly NORMAL to have anywhere from 3-6 sites in each packet remove the capability to get a link. This has been happening from the beginning. You still have 24 good, Page Rank 6 and above sites to get a link from this month, which is a WHOLE LOT more valuable than the mere $5 I charge! That's a cost of less than $0.21 PER SITE for Page Rank 6 and above backlinks!!

Angela,
First let’s be clear here; I think your service has been great and the price very low. Even if half of the links get removed I think it is still a great deal. I’ve had good results with these backllinks myself.

This is not about "grumbling" but about facts. I went back and found even more backlinks deleted. However, I’m going to keep creating these profiles to see what happens…

And I didn’t say that out the 30 package 6 were not working. I said out the 16 I created 6 were not good. I just do the PR7 and PR8 sites because I don’t have enough time to do all of them.

I just do the 7 and 8 PR sites, so I don’t know if the others 14 sites are holding up or no.

I agree with most of the folks in the forum; the problem maybe over a thousand people creating these profiles at the same time is raising clear red flags.

I think Joel pointed out a good idea about distributing the packages at different dates to different lists… Just my humble opinion…

[Angela V. Edwards]

Thank you, DJBory. I really am thinking about some methods to "trickle" the packets more than they are now.

[Joe118]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

Jeremy:

I wasn't aware of the language in the WSO that indicated all 30 were "Do Follow" and since I've now checked, I completely understand your POV that if they all aren't (or at least the vast majority of them aren't) DOFOLLOW then you're not getting exactly what you expected, regardless of the price.

I think Angela is a great person, so I assume that this if the links aren't DOFOLLOW when she sends the packet it is simply an oversight in the language of the WSO and she'll probably correct it.

I'm absolutely certain that at the time Angela sends the packets out the links are in fact dofollow. She has an excellent product and supports it 150%. If a site is nofollow by the time you get to use it, then they changed it after Angela's last check, right before she releases each packet.

[Joe118]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

I can find them in Google quite easily, so perhaps Google is also a mechanism for SPAM.

Google does not suggest that you go drop links there. Google does not teach you *how* to drop links there.

I think the difference between link packets and google is quite clear, really.

All I'm really saying is we should accept that in the eyes of the general population of the internet, and hence in google's eyes (because it wants what the internet audience in general wants), we're spamming if we drop links on sites just because they happen to be dofollow and have a high PR.

[belgirl]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

Yeah, the site owner should have to go through a bunch of extra work to protect themselves and their sites from having 1000 profiles created with the sole intention of sucking their PR. It makes perfect sense now.

Since it's such a good thing, I'll extent the same invitation to you that I did to Steve. List all your sites and blogs so, we can all go and set up a profile or leave a couple of comments

Knock yourself out. Sites are listed in my sig.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Joe118

All I'm really saying is we should accept that in the eyes of the general population of the internet, and hence in google's eyes (because it wants what the internet audience in general wants), we're spamming if we drop links on sites just because they happen to be dofollow and have a high PR.

I think you're WAY overestimating the sophistication of the "general population of the internet". I'd venture to guess that the majority of internet users don't even know what PR or DOFOLLOW are.

[Joe118]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

I think you're WAY overestimating the sophistication of the "general population of the internet". I'd venture to guess that the majority of internet users don't even know what PR or DOFOLLOW are.

OK I agree with that, definitely. Peace. My point was (and not properly stated, obviously; I should do better) that website owners and google are likely to think its spam.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Okay, all this discussion about Spam made me smile. So far this week I have won the Swiss lottery three times and 6 people have died and need me to get the money out of the country for them.

Some of you may have heard my story about turning in the scammer to the U.S. Secret Service:

Here is the story

Well, did you know that these people actually buy "email leads" so they can scam people? The lady who I turned in actually bought more email leads for her Nigerian connection AFTER the legal process of her getting into serious trouble for this crime had begun!!

I still have a copy of what she wrote to her "boyfriend" who was in Nigeria after she knew she was in trouble:

well i talked to my lawyers assitant today...and she told me...that only a complaint was filed against me...that no cgarges have been filed....that my arrest my for the formal complaint...the secret service still have not desided on wheather to file charges against me...so i guess that is good for me....i dont know how long they have to deside....but i think its 60 days ...but not sure....but i do feel a lot better...i just hope that me buying those email leads...will nott get me in too trouble...i dont know if they are watching my bank account....so i need to stay low ...and walk a straight path here....do you understand what i am saying???? i cant be involved in any crooked sh*t....i mean it .....i have a chance to get out of this mess it seems...so i am not going to blow it for no one.... not even you sweet heart....take that in mind...ok

Now this is REALLY what "Spam" is.

[Jeremy Kelsall]

Originally Posted by belgirl

Knock yourself out. Sites are listed in my sig.

Fair enough I'll load them up in the software tonight

[Joe118]

If you want to have a laugh and/or learn how to properly treat scammers, check out:

scambuster419.co.uk: where 419 scam artists meet their match

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Joe118

If you want to have a laugh and/or learn how to properly treat scammers, check out:

scambuster419.co.uk: where 419 scam artists meet their match

Yeah that site is great. I remember also watching an episode of Dateline NBC where they went to the UK to meet with one of these scammers (for some reason, these guys move between England and Nigeria; Edna's "boyfriend" did the same thing). They had him convinced they were falling for his plot. In the end, they really had him sweating when he realized that he was the one who had been "gotten". LOL

[Tom Brite]

Seems to be a big heated debate going on here! Ouch!

I think everyone should just go and find their own sources for backlinks (hint hint) lol!

But seriously they actually do have alot of advantage over just using the backlink packs! I personally use a mixture of my own and angela's and pauls!

Tom Brite

[internetmarketer99]

What a bunch of justifications, rationalizations, and semantic games.

As Jeremy already said, any rational person who understands this stuff and isn't trying to fool themselves knows that using those packets for IM backlinks is spamming. Forget the 'technical semantic definitions', when you're creating profiles, blogs, etc. on non-relevant sites for the purpose of gaining backlinks, you're spamming to some extent.

Why all the justifications? Personally, I do similar backlinking. We all have my own moral compass and boundries. I try to accomplish my objectives without doing stuff I'm too uncomfortable with, but I certainly know what I'm doing and don't try and fool myself - or anyone else.

Mark

[geosandler]

I tried the system of both (Angela and Paul) 2 weeks ago in 5 websites. Today 1 of my websites that was #8 in google was banned, other that was in page 5 today is in page 6. With the others, nothing happened. And now my name appears with my ip in a list of forum spammers. It was my experience with Angela´s and Paul´s backlinks.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Your site wasn't "banned"; you are experiencing the "Google Dance". This is completely NORMAL and happens to just about everybody. Mark my words, your site will be back shortly.

There are some sites who don't like links and have even created a "list" of people who have tried to leave a link on their system. A few other sites might pay attention to such a 'list'. However, it means absolutely nothing to Google or any other search engine. If it did, wouldn't you think that competitors would be getting the competition "blacklisted" all over the Internet? Of COURSE they would. If that sort of thing really mattered, all you'd have is mayhem instead of a search engine. Google knows that and they are NOT going to let something like this ruin their BILLION dollar business.

[axleman]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

I they can build article spinners with the intelligence needed ... surely Angela could invest in oDesk / elance programmer to allow her to put in a master list of sites, and build a unique randomizer based on the subscribers email address to randomly kick out 30 or so sites per month, and strip dupes? Just thinking outloud ...

Actually this is an awesome idea.. much better than what I proposed earlier. Each month the subscribers each get a randomized list. I'm not a programmer, but it doesn't sound like it would be terribly difficult for one to do.

[FranMurray]

I find this thread funny...

It just raises "eithical" questions.

The funny thing is this... I can Automate ALL of Angela's links, but the manner I was doing so was giving her sites away for free. I didn't feel that it was right (personal choice) so I changed the way the automation could be done to protect her business.

I automated Steve Aylor's BGM 3.0 Package too.

(I am not making a "judgment call" here)

The thing I have realized is this... some warrior will not see it that way I do. That is their choice.

If people put themselves over the rest of the community, they will ruin it for everyone else.

Just my Two Cents,
Francis

[Doug D]

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Come get your "angela" course on how to find high PR sites to get links from!
I know you want to help the newbies. I still maintain that your service is way under priced.
Raise the price to $20, 30 whatever. Put together a course teaching people how to find their own sites. Yes, I know people could do that now. Surely Angela has honed her craft over time. All those little tips, tricks and nuances would have real value.
You say the attrition rate for this month is the same as past months. I know your honorable, and I don't doubt any such statements.
I do still stand by my sentiments of a couple weeks ago...with the whole affiliate thing and the numbers growing...that there could likely be more prevalent "countermeasures" by G. or these types of sites themselves in the future.(anyone's guess)
The decrease in the numbers of peeps hitting a handful of sites at one time, would decrease. You have a valuable product for newbies (some would still purchase the packets)
People like me would still buy the packets. Also, although going out and looking for the sites on my own...would be a terrible use of my time-- I would be inclined to purchase such a course for purposes of training an employee/outsourcer to do such work.
The increase in price might more than offset the decreases in packets sold?
Also, I'll bet you would make for a great teacher, and you might really enjoy such a thing? It could be an ongoing dealeo with new resources, tips and tricks every month?
Anyway, just a thought

[axleman]

FWIW

I keep a spread sheet of every profile I have made since I joined up in June.

Out of 160 total sites (June/July, including Pauls 50 packs as well), 95 are still good. That's roughly a 40% loss rate which is in line with what others are posting. I don't know how that compares with previous months.

[Doug D]

Axleman,
I also keep all of my urls bookmarked (in my case), in an "Angela" folder. I bought all back packets a couple of months ago (when I 1st discovered Angela), and I have done the 120 from Paul since inception. I don't go back and check them. What I noticed though, is that a fair amount of Paul's sites have very little traffic--like 2, 3, 4k a month. In my humble opinion, those types of sites would be much more likely to notice a big spike in traffic ("spam" as some here call it--which I wouldnt argue with), and consequently...take action. So it wouldn't surprise if a good deal of them had taken action on my profiles, even though I do my due diligence in blending in, and trying to set up a *non-spammy* type profile.

[axleman]

Maybe the key is to wait and do them several weeks later after the herd hits

[Angela V. Edwards]

For those of you who think backlinking is "dying" because some sites react negatively to links, read this. This was written LAST OCTOBER; 60 days after my program began. This site had 20,000 spam posts in one week. I just found this site a few minutes ago, so it certainly has never been a portion of MY program. "Spam posts" which cause sites to shut down registrations and such have been an issue probably pretty much the entire time the World Wide Web has been around. This is not going to "kill backlinking forever" or any of that other stuff people have been saying.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Franco Mocke

Angela,

How long is "will be back shortly?". I have a site that has disappeared for about two weeks now and it hasn't come back. It totally disappeared, nowhere to be seen.

The dance doesn't normally take this long but I HAVE heard of this happening to a couple of folks. Keep me posted on how it goes with your site.

[Google Lover]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

The dance doesn't normally take this long but I HAVE heard of this happening to a couple of folks. Keep me posted on how it goes with your site.

Yeah angela, my site too is dancing. Hate it when suddenly my no. of visitors drop like anything.

I hope my site will be more or less stablize. It's been around for more than 6 months already. and it is still dancing. hahaha.

Care for advice?

[Joe118]

I think you hit on a really important point:

Creating a link and then having it removed is a small signal to google that the link is not valuable (maybe it is spam, or inappropriate, or off-topic). Creating many links and then 20-30% disappear quickly is a HUGE SIGNAL for google that your links are not valuable. Having this happen across MANY SITES is an enormous red flag to google that there's something common between all those sites AND that the links are useless.

In other words, like I've been saying all along, saturation and overuse devalues the product. Diversify and find your own places to drop backlinks, and you'll be fine. Stick ONLY to Angela's packet and your site is a part of a large group of sites that lose links together at the same time, etc. Do you really want your site to be grouped with pharma sites and worse, porn?

I still think Angela has a tremendously valuable product. However, it's overused and worse, creates a large, easily identifyable group of sites that behave, link-wise, in a similar fashion.

[peter gibson]

Originally Posted by geosandler

I tried the system of both (Angela and Paul) 2 weeks ago in 5 websites. Today 1 of my websites that was #8 in google was banned, other that was in page 5 today is in page 6. With the others, nothing happened. And now my name appears with my ip in a list of forum spammers. It was my experience with Angela´s and Paul´s backlinks.

Angela or Paul,
I am wondering is there a way that you could find out if this person is being genuine or just here to troll and be a knucklehead? Do you have a record of the IP address that you could maybe back trace to see if this person (quoted above) actually did buy your stuff?

I'm asking because that is a pretty heavy dis on you and Paul and the first real problem I've heard of coming from your products. I wouldn't take something like that lightly if I were you guys.

Geosander, if you are being legit than I have no gripe. But I would ask, for the benefit of many of us, Angela and Paul included, that you provide us with more proof that this happened to you as a result of using their products.

[Google Lover]

Thank you Mike Ong for the wonderful personal reviews.

i have also wanted to raise some of the common issues you highlighted.

i really wish we can do something to solve these issues especially the part on webmasters deleting our account. It happened to me too, many a times, and i was totally disheartened because i put a lot of effort in doing it.

So here comes another question, for those who are familiar with Free Traffic System, is it any better than Angela's links? in terms of time taken to build backlinks, sustainability of backlinks, and backlinks' strength (does it really matter if it comes from high PR), etc?

wad do ya think: using both FTS + Angela's links together with Francis Murray automated script would give a better result?

I need your opinion, thank you so much!

Originally Posted by mikeong88

Below is a list of my observations for the past 2 months of using mainly Angela's package for my backlinking operation:

Ok I am typing these real fast and hopefully you will bear with my Spelling and Grammer mistakes.

Google Loves Them :p

1. First, the sites in Angela package work great. Google has a lot of respect for this sites.

A lot of my sites were able to climb their way up very FAST. And it is also less time consuming than to write different articles and put them on article directories or blogs.

I really enjoy building links using the profile pages because I get to see New Sites and learn New Topics.

Ok now is a list of DONT's with Angela's links

Diversify is the key to Google's Algorithm

2. DONT link your webpages or homepage ONLY with Angela links ...The results are poor. I have try that out.

Some of my well-optimized pages never came out of the hole. Not even with 60 High PR links !

*DIVERSITY* is the key. Mix your backlinks with articles, blogs, forums, videos and any others you can think of.

Trust me...google knows how to determine the TYPE of your backlink page.

The recent additional options of choosing results between Blogs, Reviews, Forums and Videos tell you they look into the type of pages.

Every link drop affect your page anchor score

3. The 2nd reason why you want to diversify is that if the webmaster start to remove your links, your ranking would not drop so drastically.

Pls take note your ranking will definitely drop due to the re-calculation of score. (Also depending on your competitors' page)

Angela package is drowning

Now here comes the BIG ISSUE...the spamming is becoming of great concern.

This is the reason why I am posting here. I like to work behind the background making money silently

I am seeing many of my previous backlinks dropping like flies...Why do I know? Because I used an unique name for all my profile links.

They are getting deindexed when the webmaster removed those links. (yes I check it myself using Google Search)

Blacksheeps are ruining the package

The members using Angela's package are NOT DOING us any favors by posting rubbish everywhere.

I see people posting "asdfasdfasdf" , "Unactive links" on the blogs, comments and everywhere. Why are those members exposing themselves?

Work under the radar

We are supposely to be working under the radar ! I see porn usernames...I see pharmatical usernames...

All this are just driving the webmasters crazy...and this keeps building up...

So far those sites that survive are sites that don't display Latest Blogs, Comments on the homepage or rather the webmaster is simply helpless.

Removal of Indexed Backlinks is a BIG ISSUE

All my previous backlinks are dropping like flies and if you are building the backlinks based on groups...a 20% removal of your links would cause a BIG change on your site due to the page scoring system.

Remember GOOGLE loves them...so what if their Darlings remove your vote?

The links removed might have accounted for a good amount of our page-ranking ? No one knows.

Our backlinking style = spammer suddenly?

Your site might fall into the spammer-type of category.

1. Mass and Short lived backlinks

2. Removal of voting from high authority sites (it has become a double-edged sword)

3. Similar group of backlinks

4. No text except links.

Cheap but cost effectiveness?

Yes the package only cost $5...

A few non-working links are fine with me but the problem is when our indexed links are removed, your ranking WILL DROP .

Whether Big or Small depends on your diversity and age of your existing backlinks.

I am not sure whether there is any penalty...but I do see my ranking drop drastically 2-3 pages back.... There is TIME COST involved on our part.

A Waste to those valuable sites

Angela links are some of the MOST POWERFUL links I ever used. I can't bear to see them go to waste but yet I can't take the risk.

I have never ranked sites as fast and powerful with other links. Google **loves** these user-generated sites with minimum external links.

Hopefully Angela can come up with something on this SPAMMING issue. We need the members to cooperate.

Might be better without Angela Links in the "Long Run"

That's the question for you to answer. Why build relationship with strong sites only for them to remove votes from you?

I really give up on those brainless spammers...now I can only use Angela links to account for 20% of my backlinks and the rankings seem to be getting stable now.

Now I don't even know which links are SAFE to use now....end of my story...

[Terry Kyle]

To add to the debate, I use a combination of links from:

- Angela
- PJ
- Warrior Jonathan Leger's My Way Links
- Steve Aylor's Backlink Goldmine 3.0, and,
- My own research (free SEO Quake toolbar on Firefox is great)

The 4 services above are high value, low-cost offerings by great people BUT I believe that it's risky to be too over-reliant on any one option.

For example, Angela has gotten loads of (unwarranted) heat just in this thread and could decide to close her service, then what for her subscribers?

Spreading your vulnerability just makes good business sense.

Also, while you are backlinking (especially copy and pasting HTML code into profiles), backlink your target site AND your YouTube video AND a keyword-title-relevant GoArticle AND a Wetpaint page AND etc etc, you get the idea.

The beauty of a good backlinking campaign is that you can really DOMINATE a specific KW phrase with a bunch of your different sites/pages that increases traffic and blocks competitors (don't forget that Google usually likes a variety of sites on its SERPs but they can be all/mostly yours).

The great thing here is that backllinking 6 different pages takes no longer than one with HTML pasting (but much longer with WYSIWYG sites).

If you really thought about it, how else could Google determine what sites should be on a SERP page #1 but through backlinks? Google teams subjectively assessing the quality of every single site in every single niche?

The cost and time would be astronomical. Backlinking seems here to stay.

However, it DOES seem likely that G will get better at spotting obviously artificial link building which will require new tactics. It's all a kind of game in motion.

With these profiles that we backlinkers set up, of course they are a form of spam BUT these sites are also hitting us with constant banner ads for diet products, dating sites etc so we are ALL selling something but a profile with backlinks seems pretty harmless to me on the scale of spam malevolence given that we aren't forcing that profile on anyone.

[JamesM]

Last week I completed half of Angelas July packet, and already my pages are climbing the SERPs. The only other thing I've done is submit my sitemap to Google.

This is for a brand new site, and while the site itself is SEO'd to death I think that the movement I'm seeing is largely due to Angelas method.

[djbory]

Originally Posted by geosandler

I tried the system of both (Angela and Paul) 2 weeks ago in 5 websites. Today 1 of my websites that was #8 in google was banned, other that was in page 5 today is in page 6. With the others, nothing happened. And now my name appears with my ip in a list of forum spammers. It was my experience with Angela´s and Paul´s backlinks.

Originally Posted by Franco Mocke

Angela,

How long is "will be back shortly?". I have a site that has disappeared for about two weeks now and it hasn't come back. It totally disappeared, nowhere to be seen.

Ok, something similar happened to me too. One of my sites was in page one of Google for all my keywords, then suddenly it disappeared. It now has been gone for 2 weeks.

Is not ranking for any keywords; it is nowhere to be found. I just can see it when I search with the whole URL, so I know it is still indexed.

The site is not new; it’s about a year old..

Let me make this very clear: even though many of my profiles have been deleted, I DON’T BLAME ANGELA’S BAKLINKS for what happen to my site. I have been using the links for other sites and they are still there, one of them went to page one of GOOGLE and it is still there.

I just don’t know why this happened. I have done nothing special to this site; just get backlinks as with my other sites.

The reason I’m posting is not to badmouth Angela’s or Paul’s Backlinks, but to see if anybody have a clue or can somehow help me to get my site back on track…

Does anybody have an answer for this? Was the site ‘BANNED’ or ‘SLAPPED’? And what do you guys think I could do to get it back? Any help?:confused:

DJBory

[djbory]

Originally Posted by Joe118

I think you hit on a really important point:

Creating a link and then having it removed is a small signal to google that the link is not valuable (maybe it is spam, or inappropriate, or off-topic). Creating many links and then 20-30% disappear quickly is a HUGE SIGNAL for google that your links are not valuable. Having this happen across MANY SITES is an enormous red flag to google that there's something common between all those sites AND that the links are useless.

I don't think, however, that a bunch of links being deleted would affect negatively, or get a site banned or slapped. If that were truth, so to destroy the competition, I'd outsource 100 hundreds or so profile links and then I go back and deleted all in one day. Don't ya think?

DJBory

[bay37]

Let me just say that any webmaster (competitor) could oh-so-easily damage your websites (even get them banned) by simply reporting you guys to various "authorities" and what not.

If I was competing with any of you for a good keyword and I came across this thread - you're done. tough.

[djbory]

Yeah, it is me with yet another post… Sorry for the continuous posting…

This is just an idea; How about if we all let ANGELA and PAUL know the sites that are deleting the profiles, so she can, maybe every other day, send us an update to which sites not to use.

Or maybe we can send us email or PM between us to share which of these sites are deleting the profiles. I’m open to share my list of sites that are not working or that have deleted my profiles.

I think we could help each other a lot by doing this, and maybe save us the time that we spend creating those profiles that are going to be deleted anyway later on.

If somebody is willing to work with me in this, this is what I propose: I do 1-15, you do 16-30. After a week we share each other the sites that are no good. This way we can reduce 50% the # of profiles being deleted.

If anybody is interested please PM me and we can do this for the next month packages…

I’m open to suggestion as well…

[djbory]

Originally Posted by bay37

Let me just say that any webmaster (competitor) could oh-so-easily damage your websites (even get them banned) by simply reporting you guys to various "authorities" and what not.

If I was competing with any of you for a good keyword and I came across this thread - you're done. tough.

If that were true, I just go reporting my competitors for any reason I can think of. Your statement has no GROUNDS AT ALL.

[geosandler]

Yes, I bought their stuff. I´m telling my experience because in my sites I didn´t use nothing more for baclinks only their packages. And I´m sure that my site was banned because when I review it in google webmaster center this text appears in a red box: "This site may be in violation of Google's quality guidelines. More Details". When I click in more details this appears: "Pages on your site may not appear in Google search results pages due to violations of the Google webmaster guidelines. Please review our webmaster guide lines and modify your site so that it meets those guidelines. Once your site meets our guidelines, you can request reconsideration and we'll evaluate your site. Submit a reconsideration request" For this is that I think that my site was banned.
My site is only a simple blog with original text and nothing more and I didn´t use any other technique of backlinks. Maybe for others their packages were useful but for me don´t.

[djbory]

Originally Posted by geosandler

Yes, I bought their stuff. I´m telling my experience because in my sites I didn´t use nothing more for baclinks only their packages. And I´m sure that my site was banned because when I review it in google webmaster center this text appears in a red box: "This site may be in violation of Google's quality guidelines. More Details". My site is only a simple blog with original text and nothing more. I didn´t use any other technique of backlinks.

I DIDN’T KNOW Google would send those kind of messages. I didn’t get that message though.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by bay37

Let me just say that any webmaster (competitor) could oh-so-easily damage your websites (even get them banned) by simply reporting you guys to various "authorities" and what not.

No, they can't.

[Joe118]

OK, while I agree that a signal from a single website is not going to affect your ranking, however, a signal from a set A of significant authority sites, about removing links from another significant set of sites B, may or may not affect your ranking. Especially if the link creation and link removal times follow a common pattern.

It'd have to be on a really huge scale though, something that google could believe didn't represent the manipulation of any one website owner or even a group of website owners. I don't have any idea whether losing 20-30% of your backlinks from (just as an example) Angela's backlinks packets, when it happens to hundreds of other sites at the same time, and when the links were originally *all* on profile pages, is significant for google.

[djbory]

Hey Steven,

I’ve been following your posts; you seem to be a very knowledgeable and experienced guy. What would you do if a website is in page one of Google for a few KW’s and one good day it just disappeared? It is any way to get that site back to first page? Or is it done for good?

DJBory

[richnash33]

All I can say is that I am very happy with the results I have seen. I am currently in the top 5 for almost every keyword I have attempted for my site.And trust me, a couple of these words are VERY competitive.

[bay37]

Originally Posted by djbory

If that were true, I just go reporting my competitors for any reason I can think of. Your statement has no GROUNDS AT ALL.

Sure...

[mdzarate]

Thank you for coming back to post this, if you were lying most probably you would not come back to keep talking about it, so it must be true what happened to you and may be we all should do a research and be more careful on how we are getting our links.

Google hate link farms, any type of spaymmy link building and sometimes something that used to be good becomes spammy due to the high level of posting by spammers, I am wondering if it is possible that some of the places where you posted your links were over spammed and got you in trouble? hard to find out.

I hope your site comes out of this penalty soon and I hope it does not happen to my sites.

Originally Posted by geosandler

Yes, I bought their stuff. I´m telling my experience because in my sites I didn´t use nothing more for baclinks only their packages. And I´m sure that my site was banned because when I review it in google webmaster center this text appears in a red box: "This site may be in violation of Google's quality guidelines. More Details". When I click in more details this appears: "Pages on your site may not appear in Google search results pages due to violations of the Google webmaster guidelines. Please review our webmaster guide lines and modify your site so that it meets those guidelines. Once your site meets our guidelines, you can request reconsideration and we'll evaluate your site. Submit a reconsideration request" For this is that I think that my site was banned.
My site is only a simple blog with original text and nothing more and I didn´t use any other technique of backlinks. Maybe for others their packages were useful but for me don´t.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by geosandler

Yes, I bought their stuff. I´m telling my experience because in my sites I didn´t use nothing more for baclinks only their packages. And I´m sure that my site was banned because when I review it in google webmaster center this text appears in a red box: "This site may be in violation of Google's quality guidelines. More Details". When I click in more details this appears: "Pages on your site may not appear in Google search results pages due to violations of the Google webmaster guidelines. Please review our webmaster guide lines and modify your site so that it meets those guidelines. Once your site meets our guidelines, you can request reconsideration and we'll evaluate your site. Submit a reconsideration request" For this is that I think that my site was banned.
My site is only a simple blog with original text and nothing more and I didn´t use any other technique of backlinks. Maybe for others their packages were useful but for me don´t.

There can be many reasons for this condition and it almost always has to do with content -- such as keyword stuffing -- and things other than backlinking.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by djbory

Hey Steven,

I’ve been following your posts; you seem to be a very knowledgeable and experienced guy. What would you do if a website is in page one of Google for a few KW’s and one good day it just disappeared? It is any way to get that site back to first page? Or is it done for good?

DJBory

It happens. I had one site go off for about 10 days to two weeks, then it came back and was ranked higher after that.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

There can be many reasons for this condition and it almost always has to do with content -- such as keyword stuffing -- and things other than backlinking.

That is what people don't seem to understand. I test every, single, site with my Angela page and my Backlinks article. Every site. If Google was actually banning sites for some of those backlinks, or if Google was "noticing" that some of the links were being removed and then banning people, then why are my two things still at the top of Google out of MILLIONS of competing sites??? And yes, I'm on the "list" created by some of the websites too...of people not to allow into their sites. And I'm on Ufaq's "blacklist".

All of the same things happened to me that may have happened to you as you are doing your backlinks, and my stuff is still at the top!

And my links are still somewhat "diverse", too. Although I have to only put sites where links can be added 'under the radar' now, they are NOT all one type of site or one method of placing the link. Only a HUMAN would know that they are 'profile' links. And technically, they are NOT all "profile" links; go back into July's packet and take a look...you'll see. Thousands of people sign up on sites and only lurk. Thousands. On many sites, more people lurk than actually post. Ask any forum owner. This has been a well known fact since forums and "community type" sites began.

Not to mention that pretty much everyone who has posted on this thread has a sig file to add to their backlinks which blows the "the only backlinks you have are profile links" right out of the water.

[peter gibson]

Originally Posted by geosandler

Yes, I bought their stuff. I´m telling my experience because in my sites I didn´t use nothing more for baclinks only their packages. And I´m sure that my site was banned because when I review it in google webmaster center this text appears in a red box: "This site may be in violation of Google's quality guidelines. More Details". When I click in more details this appears: "Pages on your site may not appear in Google search results pages due to violations of the Google webmaster guidelines. Please review our webmaster guide lines and modify your site so that it meets those guidelines. Once your site meets our guidelines, you can request reconsideration and we'll evaluate your site. Submit a reconsideration request" For this is that I think that my site was banned.
My site is only a simple blog with original text and nothing more and I didn´t use any other technique of backlinks. Maybe for others their packages were useful but for me don´t.

Geo,
Firstly, that right sucks. Sorry to hear it mate. However Steve is right, there are many other factors that may have contributed to this happening. Maybe once you get your post count up you can PM the site URL to someone that can pinpoint exactly why it happened. There are plenty of cats around here that I'm sure would help you out. I would be willing to look at it myself, but there are likely others around here more adept at that sort of thing.

I can only tell you that in my experience with Angela's and Paul's packets, I have seen nothing but positive results. Thankfully even my "dances with Google" only lasted a few days to a week.

Keep us posted.