The END of Angela's Backlinks?

by ryandales2000 297 replies
I am a subscriber of Angela's backlinks-packet. I was about to register at The Netscape Unofficial FAQ when I read this! I am afraid that this is the beginning of the end for this type of link-building. What do you Warriors think?

No Free Advertising - ATTENTION SPAMLINKERS
The Netscape Unofficial FAQ does not allow FREE advertising. Posting an ad-link (commercial) in our forums,in a signature or anywhere in your profile information, etc., is strictly prohibited and will lead to termination of account and removal of the post that includes the link. If you wish to advertise on The Netscape Unofficial FAQ or do not understand this policiy, please contact The Webmaster for more information and/or rates. Also note that any user violating this agreement and the account terminated will be listed in our forum for all to see. Your IP and domain will also be listed on several of the major BlackLists such as SpamCop and Spamhaus..

A violation of the above "No Free Advertising" will result in the forfeiture of your private data as well as posting your violation on our public forum.


Also Note: If you purchased a 30-site list from ANGELA EDWARDS at angelasdiscountmarket, you got ripped off. Do not even THINK about attempting to post a link in our forum as you may be included in legal action.




#search engine optimization #angela #backlinks #end
  • Profile picture of the author The Copy Nazi
    Banned
    Uh-oh. You think the party's over?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880189].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Okane
      Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
      Signature

      signature is on holiday

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880245].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author webmatic
        Lol great idea but hope they don't do it the same for you too :p
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        @ OP .. I don't think its the beginning of the end as Angela's Backlinks are working good for most of my friends and i am going to try it myself too so will get back to you with recent updates about it but i am not trying it right now as it must be dangerous as mentioned in above posts lol
        Thanks
        PHYza
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880401].message }}
      • Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        Exactly. I'm sure they got spammed because of all the "black hatters" giving the packets away for free (even after I told them NOT to). But if getting someone banned from Google was as simple as placing them on a "black list" on your website, we'd have TREMENDOUS power against ALL of our competitors. It doesn't work that way.

        They are "blacklisting" ANYONE who had ANY link at all on that forum, too. I only had my "Angela" link and a link to my article, which is NOT a 'sales page' and therefore could NOT be considered "spam". Forums, for the most part, just don't like links. ANY links.
        Signature
        -----------------------------------------


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[881486].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author mikeong88
          Banned
          [DELETED]
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[881516].message }}
          • Originally Posted by mikeong88 View Post

            That is actually the NORM...No forums would allow their members to post their links on any threads..unless its a ghost forum

            I was puzzled with your May package...so many of them are blogs and forums ...

            Was wondering how do I post a respectable link behind like you mentioned

            Most of us are not using "non-commercial" backlinks like Angela or Backlinks...
            Yeah, I hear you. With May's packet, those sites were SUCH High Page Rank that I WANTED you to be able to get a link from them. Obviously, that's not possible with some of those places; usually because of the spamming. I have 2 more Page Rank 9 sites, a Page Rank 8 site and a handful of Page Rank 7 sites that I can't give you for this reason. That's just sad to me as I want the customers to get the best backlinks.

            I guess I just keep those sites for my own stuff and give the customers the sites that can't be ruined. There IS a way to get a "sales" backlink on a forum without it being removed, but it requires time and patience and the spammers don't have that.
            Signature
            -----------------------------------------


            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[881545].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author sagasu44
              Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

              Yeah, I hear you. With May's packet, those sites were SUCH High Page Rank that I WANTED you to be able to get a link from them. Obviously, that's not possible with some of those places; usually because of the spamming. I have 2 more Page Rank 9 sites, a Page Rank 8 site and a handful of Page Rank 7 sites that I can't give you for this reason. That's just sad to me as I want the customers to get the best backlinks.
              Ok, I only just bought angela's package and started on the number one site in the list following the instructions, set account and wrote a blog post which was a kind of introduction and placed a very simple anchor text link to my homepage which has no affiliate product, it does have some adsense though, still I was suprised when I was told my post was removed due to spamming. I wonderred if I had got something wrong but then decided to just move on to the next which I have had no problems with.

              So, I'm only onto the third one, but don't feel phased as the net is evolving constantly.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[890133].message }}
              • Originally Posted by sagasu44 View Post

                Ok, I only just bought angela's package and started on the number one site in the list following the instructions, set account and wrote a blog post which was a kind of introduction and placed a very simple anchor text link to my homepage which has no affiliate product, it does have some adsense though, still I was suprised when I was told my post was removed due to spamming. I wonderred if I had got something wrong but then decided to just move on to the next which I have had no problems with.

                So, I'm only onto the third one, but don't feel phased as the net is evolving constantly.
                Most of these types of sites will be fine, but there WILL be a few of them who will do this sort of thing. Remember, this has NOTHING to do with you or your own website; this is a result of the actual spamming they DID get from the folks who got the packets from a "black hat" forum. They have an 'alert' set up for ANY link at all and anyone who puts a link there will get the same message.

                There are still a great number of really GOOD sites in the packet; if you come across one of these, just move on. My packets have been "known" for longer than Paul's but the same thing with the "black hatters" is now beginning to happen to Paul's links. I don't know WHY people would want great links ruined, but obviously they don't care.
                Signature
                -----------------------------------------


                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891193].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Jon Steel
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        LOL!!! That's really funny. I think this is b/s - just skip this site. The big backlink penalties come from when there are reciprocal link issues...not one-way links. That's why I stick with angela and don't do the reciprocal link thing...cause you can't trust other people's stuff...and if you are linked to them - you share their price...

        js
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892824].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marhelper
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        Lemonade from lemons... I love it.

        The truth is that these type of sites are a dime a dozen. If one makes big threats then move on to the next one. Make sure that you fill out the entire "About me" section and other sections ... do not just chuck 100 links on the site either, that is an obvious red flag that newbies violate again and again.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1421640].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ebizman87
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        LOl..Nice tip.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1438589].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by ebizman87 View Post

          LOl..Nice tip.
          Won't work. Linking doesn't work that way. Google won't penalize a site because of backlinks. The most they will do is not count the links and your site will drop like a rock
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1438823].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author redfc
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        Great thought! lol
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1623158].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Adams
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        Exactly, People look sooo crazy when they post things like that. Oooo we are going to take legal action... ha what a joke.
        Signature
        P.S. If you found my post useful, please click the "Thanks" button below...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2673514].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author FredJones
          Good - tell me the set of names you are competing with and pay me $1 per name - I am going to insert the names with closed eyes.

          Seriously, spamming is not a recommendable practice at all but if someone claims they have an open and public service that allows you to misuse it and defame people is nothing better either.
          Signature

          $1 gold: WSO That Instantly Transforms You Into A Content Production Engine

          $2.95 GoDaddy .com domains today: Click here.
          I am offering a free website - get it now (and they offer you a free domain with this).
          Find high-commission easy Amazon niches within 5 seconds here.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2673930].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author garben2011
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        Yep. Actually there are sites all over the Internet that have been doing this kind of thing for years. I remember playing games online at a site a few years ago who had a page devoted to the top spamming websites online and said they shared the list with other places similar to what this site is saying.

        You raise a good point about how you could do it to hurt your competition but these sites don't look at that or care about it. Their concern is stopping the spammer and they assume that is going to be the site getting the link.
        Signature

        Interested In Easy Micro Projects You Can Do In Your Spare Time? Get Paid To Help Me!

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3468012].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DDavis
        Originally Posted by Okane View Post

        Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...
        LMAO... Im still laughing
        Signature

        If You Want Serious BackLinking, Google friendly Backlinks, And Sick Of Paying An Arm And A leg For them. Well Look No Further..... Keep Watching This Spot COMING SOON.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4437311].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SaSeoPete
    Geez that's crazy they even mention the backlink package.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880265].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yonaswedo
    Is this a case of hoax? I hope Angela dive a clarification on this.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880281].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ryandales2000
      This is NOT a HOAX or a JOKE..Try registering at The Netscape Unofficial FAQ and try leaving a link at your profile page of that website and you will read the above warning.

      See for yourself.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880329].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stevenh512
    This is a case of one site having a problem with people posting links, most likely because of the fact that the backlink packets are being given away for free on a number of forums and it's led to people spamming these sites like there's no tomorrow. Angela has already stopped including sites like this in her backlink packets (forums where you have to make a post to include your link, and blogs where you have to leave a comment to include your link). Considering that you get 30 sites a month, and I've gone through 3 month's packets (that's 90 sites) and have only found this one site publicly stating that they have a problem with people leaving links there, personally I'd say it's far from "the end" of Angela's backlinks.. lol

    edit: It's also worth pointing out that the same post on the same forum says "If you signed up and paid for CLICKBANK you may have been ripped off big time, we believe it to be a SCAM!!!!!" (do they even know what Clickbank is?), has ezinearticles and goarticles (oh, and hubpages too) on their "blacklist" and recommends buying paid links (from their "link manager firm" of course) even though everyone knows what Google thinks about paid links that aren't nofollow.
    Signature

    This signature intentionally left blank.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880328].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jimerson Farveez
    oh my god, Me too checked it, It is dangerous think, If we got banned then there is nothing there at all. However, I don't think all the sites are like that, may be this one only, I am getting some good results from her package....... however, If we would have seen these kind of notices from a site, we have to OMIT that site, that is it..... we cannot put our blame on her, she had helped us to get good links.......
    Think like this, the guys not only following her package but there are millions of guys all over the world, then they too can check this and wanna add links, on that case what those forums guys will do, Ok whatever, if they want to STOP this, they just have to remove that option over there in their forum....... have to disable it...... Very simple in their views and our views.....(In their views, they have to disable it, otherwise, in our views we have to omit it...
    Signature
    Search Engine Optimization Services in Delray Beach, FL
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880366].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mickm
    Only one non-responsive site out of 90 isn't bad going by any means. That's an amazing success rate.

    I don't think it's the end of this type of backlinking, it's just an over protective site. Links are what make the web.. the web.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880378].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stevenh512
    BTW I absolutely love how the admin at that forum sets such a great example for the rest of his community by violating the same terms of service he expects everyone else to follow (his sig links to a commercial site, by his own definition it's a "spam link").
    Signature

    This signature intentionally left blank.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880386].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ryandales2000
      Personally, I never thought I was ripped off by Angela. Far from it. I maintained that her WSO is still the best WSO I ever bought from this forum. Especially considering the price of her WSO.

      I was just thinking of what will happen if many webmasters will do the same as I experienced INCREASING number of warnings from webmasters. The first time I tried this backlinking method it was sooo easy...Encountered no warnings. But now there are already many webmasters who are wary of people doing this type of links on their websites.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880435].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Okane
        With an increasing number of people using Angela's backling packages, it might become a bit obvious for webmasters that something's going on at their site.

        I tried to find similar high PR websites myself by basically googling for "public profile" and checking the top results. I found one PR6 site and was able to leave my links in the public profile... without hundreds of Angela's backlinkers doing the same.

        BUT... it took me ~15 minutes to do all this. Using Angela's backlinks is way faster, so I will continue to use them, too.
        Signature

        signature is on holiday

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880454].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CTABUK
    I know linking is a pain in the butt, I wrote this here in Warriors a few weeks back -
    'I am not certain what Angela's link system is, but let's suppose it's a linking system that aims at the market in general. Now, if, 200 people sign up for that linking programme and she begins to link those sites, then Google will suddenly see 200 sites all with the basic link format. The bot's will say 'blackhat - possibly and down rate sites using the system'.

    Now, this is not me trying to be clever, I try to help out - so the next time you see a multi link system, think carefully before beginning.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880410].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author 4morereferrals
      Whats the magic number? 200?

      There are 1,000's of sites with super high PR giving out 200 links per minute, and google hasnt "downgraded" their link value.

      Go Articles / EZA / CNN / The BBC / Google / come to mind.

      I think this theory is just a guess, based upon nothing more than an opinion.

      Originally Posted by CTABUK View Post

      I know linking is a pain in the butt, I wrote this here in Warriors a few weeks back -
      'I am not certain what Angela's link system is, but let's suppose it's a linking system that aims at the market in general. Now, if, 200 people sign up for that linking programme and she begins to link those sites, then Google will suddenly see 200 sites all with the basic link format. The bot's will say 'blackhat - possibly and down rate sites using the system'.

      Now, this is not me trying to be clever, I try to help out - so the next time you see a multi link system, think carefully before beginning.
      Signature
      Rank Ascend Network - High PR Links / Guaranteed Rankings Increase
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880463].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author 4morereferrals
        This style linking is a chess match ...

        Use what the webmasters give you

        They take something away

        You find another way to capitlize

        Its not death but evolution ...
        Signature
        Rank Ascend Network - High PR Links / Guaranteed Rankings Increase
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880469].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author CTABUK
        Originally Posted by 4morereferrals View Post

        Whats the magic number? 200?

        There are 1,000's of sites with super high PR giving out 200 links per minute, and google hasnt "downgraded" their link value.

        Go Articles / EZA / CNN / The BBC / Google / come to mind.

        I think this theory is just a guess, based upon nothing more than an opinion.
        The pagerank either internal or the foolbar (no typo ) has no bearing on SERP - I don't guess. I deal in facts. Anyone who believes in a high pr page link obtaining a higher serp is deceiving themselves.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880477].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Okane
          Originally Posted by CTABUK View Post

          Anyone who believes in a high pr page link obtaining a higher serp is deceiving themselves.
          This is contrary to my own experience. I am not interested in opinions, only in facts, experiments, tests.

          If you can bring an article for a keyword with lots of competition on page one of the SERPs within 8 hours (as I did with just 10 Angela's backlinks), I'd be very interested to know how you do that.
          Signature

          signature is on holiday

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880487].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author 4morereferrals
            Quite an accomplishment .... how do you define "lots of competition" ?

            Originally Posted by Okane View Post

            This is contrary to my own experience. I am not interested in opinions, only in facts, experiments, tests.

            If you can bring an article for a keyword with lots of competition on page one of the SERPs within 8 hours (as I did with just 10 Angela's backlinks), I'd be very interested to know how you do that.
            Signature
            Rank Ascend Network - High PR Links / Guaranteed Rankings Increase
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880660].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Okane
              Originally Posted by 4morereferrals View Post

              Quite an accomplishment .... how do you define "lots of competition" ?
              (search volume per month / results for search in quotes / without quotes)
              A: (12.000 / 35.800 / 200.000)
              B: (12.100 / 26.200 / 2.310.000)

              I posted more details in the "Angela Experiment" thread / page 3 (sorry, can't post links, yet).
              Signature

              signature is on holiday

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880683].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author 4morereferrals
                Thank you for posting your details.

                I believe you would get some rather lively debate as to whether your example are "competitive" terms. Its really hard to know.

                You could have 10 sites really working hard for that term/phrase, armed with 1,000's of articles, hundreds of site pages and even more backlinks already in place.

                Originally Posted by Okane View Post

                (search volume per month / results for search in quotes / without quotes)
                A: (12.000 / 35.800 / 200.000)
                B: (12.100 / 26.200 / 2.310.000)

                I posted more details in the "Angela Experiment" thread / page 3 (sorry, can't post links, yet).
                Signature
                Rank Ascend Network - High PR Links / Guaranteed Rankings Increase
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880702].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Black Hat Cat
          Banned
          Originally Posted by CTABUK View Post

          The pagerank either internal or the foolbar (no typo ) has no bearing on SERP - I don't guess. I deal in facts. Anyone who believes in a high pr page link obtaining a higher serp is deceiving themselves.
          This is why no one should pay any attention to you.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891541].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author whmarketer
            Originally Posted by blackhatcat View Post

            This is why no one should pay any attention to you.

            its true blackhatcat pagerank has no bearing on serps. I have a website with no pagerank, no backlinks and zero content that outranks PR5/PR6/PR7 websites.

            Now how do you explain that?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[894560].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author dotslash
              Originally Posted by whmarketer View Post

              its true blackhatcat pagerank has no bearing on serps. I have a website with no pagerank, no backlinks and zero content that outranks PR5/PR6/PR7 websites.

              Now how do you explain that?

              Zero content - you mean a blank page ?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[894590].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dddougal
    This is just a pointless waste of time worrying about it, so one site is whining, let them whine, Just submit to the other sites and forget all about them.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880420].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CTABUK
    If a site gets seen and SERP'd within 8 hours then it will be down to new content. It will stay high in serp for maybe one or two days, perhaps longer, then drop back.
    PR has ne bearing on SERP, and I guess someone is going to say, how do you know. I helped set this section up in Warriors and moderated on SEO here. Many people know me.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880495].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author 4morereferrals
      Lets be clear ...

      1. No one is so far is saying that a sites PR will increase its SERP.

      2. What I was eluding to earlier is ... since you discussed a links "value" or devalued value ... you must believe certain links have different value levels - else how can it be devalued? Or is it a Zero value and then some other value that is set - like a switch - On/off .... value/no value ....

      Opining that google has some arbitrary algo that looks to see if a site starts pumping out backlinks ... and then associates that site now with a "lower" or devalued value - seems ... arbitrary, and like guesswork.

      I'll stay focused on this issue for now.

      Originally Posted by CTABUK View Post

      If a site gets seen and SERP'd within 8 hours then it will be down to new content. It will stay high in serp for maybe one or two days, perhaps longer, then drop back.
      PR has ne bearing on SERP, and I guess someone is going to say, how do you know. I helped set this section up in Warriors and moderated on SEO here. Many people know me.
      Signature
      Rank Ascend Network - High PR Links / Guaranteed Rankings Increase
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880657].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author CTABUK
        Originally Posted by 4morereferrals View Post

        Lets be clear ...

        1. No one is so far is saying that a sites PR will increase its SERP.

        2. What I was eluding to earlier is ... since you discussed a links "value" or devalued value ... you must believe certain links have different value levels - else how can it be devalued? Or is it a Zero value and then some other value that is set - like a switch - On/off .... value/no value ....

        Opining that google has some arbitrary algo that looks to see if a site starts pumping out backlinks ... and then associates that site now with a "lower" or devalued value - seems ... arbitrary, and like guesswork.

        I'll stay focused on this issue for now.

        You need to think 'wikipedia' that is crammed with outgoing links. If you can show me that Google does not make reference to searches based on anchor text that have wiki connections, then you will have proved your point. However, the simple fact is that wiki is an authoritive site.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[880708].message }}
  • The Netscape Unofficial FAQ is upset! Oh no, woe is me.

    Who really cares?
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891316].message }}
  • LOL, I've actually had people write to me because they were worried because this site "blacklisted" them. If getting someone removed from Google was as simple as creating a "blacklist" on your site and adding them to it, competitors would be "blacklisting" each other all over the Internet. Can you imagine the mayhem this would cause?
    Signature
    -----------------------------------------


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891379].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author boris s
    there's no way i can say for sure it's linked to using angela's backlinks, But i've used the may and june packages and after an initial steep rise in the rankings, google has just killed my site in the rankings of late (lots of pages are gone). :/
    Again, can't say it's related to me linking on these high pr sites but it's the only new component i've added to my seo in the past 3-4 months
    Signature

    Drague et seduction, comment draguer une fille sur www.Artdeseduire.com

    Webmarketing et productivité pour les entrepreneurs

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891437].message }}
  • Check the supplemental index, boris.
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891496].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author boris s
      Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

      Check the supplemental index, boris.
      I tried with a "cade" i found on seobook but i get exactly the same results as if i just type "site:www . domain . com"
      Signature

      Drague et seduction, comment draguer une fille sur www.Artdeseduire.com

      Webmarketing et productivité pour les entrepreneurs

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891590].message }}
  • Hi Boris,

    If you go and add a load of links suddenly to a site that doesn't have many links then Google will get suspicious and start penalising you.

    The sad thing is so many things like this get ruined by people who just hammer them with no patience or regard.

    This is not the end of Angela's backlinks at all. What nonsense!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891531].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      If you go and add a load of links suddenly to a site that doesn't have many links then Google will get suspicious and start penalising you.
      I disagree completely. In fact, such an idea really doesn't make sense.
      Signature
      Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
      FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891809].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Fernando Veloso
      Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      If you go and add a load of links suddenly to a site that doesn't have many links then Google will get suspicious and start penalising you.
      Any data to back this Steve?

      Cause what you're saying is: I can penalize any site I WANT placing lots of links in 3 days.

      You're not a complete newbie so, i'll wait for your reply before jumping on the "man, you're nuts" wagon
      Signature
      People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891862].message }}
      • Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso View Post

        Any data to back this Steve?

        Cause what you're saying is: I can penalize any site I WANT placing lots of links in 3 days.
        Exactly. It doesn't make any sense. Otherwise, not only could you bring down your competitor's site, but sites that get popular very quickly with some sort of breaking news would be penalized for being popular, which is exactly what Google DOESN'T want to do.
        Signature
        Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
        FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891878].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
        Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso View Post


        Cause what you're saying is: I can penalize any site I WANT placing lots of links in 3 days.
        Hate to say it but I kinda agree that penalties are given for over linking. I have had 1 page de-indexed due to over zealous linking and the home page of a differing sites PR nulled and de-indexed due to over zealous linking. It does sound nuts but i'm afraid it may be / IS true.

        There is a lot of info on the net about this, supporting your argument and supporting the penalty argument, however from my own personal experience i would err on the side of caution and say that you need to start gradual and build up. Going in with 2000 links in a week for a site that has zero it likely to give you a headache with Google.

        The good news though is that both pages of mine that did get their PR nulled and de-indexed (and when i say deindexed I mean one day they were #2 for their chosen term and the next day they were gone, not there, not on page 100, not on page 10,000, gone) both gained their PR back and rankings back after a few weeks.

        Angelas backlink packets contain 30 each, this is not going to harm anyone. Even if you bought all her packages, all Pauls packages and another package, it is unlikely harm would be done. The penalties are there for those people who go out and get several hundred per day for sites which previously had virtually no links at all.
        Signature

        Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891954].message }}
        • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post


          The good news though is that both pages of mine that did get their PR nulled and de-indexed (and when i say deindexed I mean one day they were #2 for their chosen term and the next day they were gone, not there, not on page 100, not on page 10,000, gone) both gained their PR back and rankings back after a few weeks.
          Actually, this is the "Google Dance" and it happens to EVERYONE, regardless of the speed of building links. It normally doesn't take quite that long to come back, but I HAVE heard instances where it did.

          You are right, though, about people needed to be worried only if they have added hundreds and hundreds of links in a day; usually this sort of thing has been 'automated' somehow by software and usually all the links come from the same source or the exact same "type" of site.
          Signature
          -----------------------------------------


          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892065].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
            Hi Angela

            The Google dance some some crazy things, this was not the Google dance though ;-) My sites are very well established and the pages were not new pages, neither did they jump up and down the rankings. They vanished. From PR4 to greyed out. From Rank #2 in Google to de-indexed. The Google dance affects the SERPS not the Toolbar PR. It also tends to do it's tricks on new pages and websites not established ones (although not always the case of course)
            Signature

            Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892073].message }}
            • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

              Hi Angela

              The Google dance some some crazy things, this was not the Google dance though ;-) My sites are very well established and the pages were not new pages, neither did they jump up and down the rankings. They vanished. From PR4 to greyed out. From Rank #2 in Google to de-indexed. The Google dance affects the SERPS not the Toolbar PR. It also tends to do it's tricks on new pages and websites not established ones (although not always the case of course)
              If everything came back to the way it was before, how do you know this was not the Google Dance? I suspect that the "Google Dance" as well as what happened to your site (which might be slightly different) happens as Google updates its algorithms. They are, as we all know, on a "continuous improvement" mission to maintain their position as the #1 Search Engine. Keep in mind, however, that Google is not going to vary its algorithm SO much all at once that the entire Search Engine is affected as this could crash their standing as #1...these are "little changes" that Google makes over time.

              Which is another point I should make. People are SO worried about being "penalized by Google" as if Google was a human-like Zeus in the sky, waiting to strike us all dead. Here is what I told someone just a few minutes ago who was worried about the exact, same, thing:

              Google would have to have some sort of human intervention to KNOW that there is this particular pattern. There are over a TRILLION webpages online today and my husband figured out that in order for the Google employees (everyone from the CEO on down) to see every page, they would have to NOT sleep, NOT eat, NOT smoke, and NOT go to the bathroom ALL year and spend 100% of the ENTIRE YEAR looking at pages. Even then, they'd only get 1.57 SECONDS per page. Some pages take longer than that just to LOAD!

              Google HAS to use an algorithm. I get these backlinks by looking at the backlinks for many other websites; so there are a whole lot of sites that "legitimately" have these same, exact links. Google would be shooting itself in the foot if it penalized for this and it risks its BILLIONS of dollars a year position as the #1 Search Engine. It's not going to give up THAT MUCH money just to penalize a few puny sites like ours and our clients'.
              Signature
              -----------------------------------------


              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892091].message }}
              • Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

                Which is another point I should make. People are SO worried about being "penalized by Google" as if Google was a human-like Zeus in the sky, waiting to strike us all dead.
                People have no idea how much work it takes to trigger an actual Google "penalty". It isn't as easy as they think. And a lot of anomalies they experience are attributed to Google penalizing them for getting too many new links, adding too many new pages, etc. Well guess what? Google has a LOT more important things to do than to worry about our little sites. Most of Google's "actions" against sites are taken because of reported violations, not because of discovered ones.
                Signature
                Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
                FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892115].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                ok - lets put it this way.

                I gave 1 website which was 2 years old and had no backlink building done for it, 25 sitewide links on pr5 and pr6 sites. This contributed some 75,000 + links to it overnight. It got de-indexed and it's it's PR nulled. That is not the Google dance. That is Google saying WTF.

                Also - I gave an internal page of mine 600+ links in one evening, 2 days later, it went from PR4 to N/R and deindexed. Again, not the Google dance.

                The Google dance generally happens when an update is done and all the datacentres are busy rejigging the update and collating their databases.

                It can also happen when different datacentres are receiving different volumes of links and giving differing results when people search. One search may show you at #3, another at #14, depending on which datacentre is reporting back.

                3 things happened which make me KNOW it was a penalty and not the Google Dance.

                1. The Page Rank dropped also. PR is only updated around once every 3 months and has nothing to do with the Google dance what-so-ever.

                2. My pages got de-indexed. They did not "dance" they vanished.

                3. Both 1 and 2 co-incided with massive links being pointed to both pages.

                Please Angela, I know my websites very well, i also know what I do to promote them. It is all very well you reposting stuff about algorithm's and analogies into what you think Google does but that does not reflect on my experience in this matter. Google applied penalties to 2 of my sites pages due to over linking. Simple as that.
                Signature

                Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892142].message }}
                • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                  ok - lets put it this way.

                  I gave 1 website which was 2 years old and had no backlink building done for it, 25 sitewide links on pr5 and pr6 sites. This contributed some 75,000 + links to it overnight. It got de-indexed and it's it's PR nulled. That is not the Google dance. That is Google saying WTF.

                  Also - I gave an internal page of mine 600+ links in one evening, 2 days later, it went from PR4 to N/R and deindexed. Again, not the Google dance.

                  The Google dance generally happens when an update is done and all the datacentres are busy rejigging the update and collating their databases.

                  It can also happen when different datacentres are receiving different volumes of links and giving differing results when people search. One search may show you at #3, another at #14, depending on which datacentre is reporting back.

                  3 things happened which make me KNOW it was a penalty and not the Google Dance.

                  1. The Page Rank dropped also. PR is only updated around once every 3 months and has nothing to do with the Google dance what-so-ever.

                  2. My pages got de-indexed. They did not "dance" they vanished.

                  3. Both 1 and 2 co-incided with massive links being pointed to both pages.

                  Please Angela, I know my websites very well, i also know what I do to promote them. It is all very well you reposting stuff about algorithm's and analogies into what you think Google does but that does not reflect on my experience in this matter. Google applied penalties to 2 of my sites pages due to over linking. Simple as that.
                  Well, you can think it's a penalty; that's fine. But people have had the exact, same, thing happen to their sites when they built less than 10 links in a day. I've had PLENTY of people tell me their sites or articles or whatever "vanished". They were COMPLETELY de-indexed during this time.

                  As a matter of fact, I now send this note to EVERY new subscriber:

                  Before you download the packet: I need to make sure that everybody realizes that there is a phenomenon that we call the "Google Dance". Shortly after you start building links you will see movement in Google. Shortly after that, you may see your site go back down, or even appear to be de-indexed. This is NOT a penalty!! This is normal and temporary. It happens to EVERYONE and your site will be right back up in a day or two. It has absolutely nothing to do with how fast you're building links: it happens to EVERYONE, regardless of the speed of link building. It's normal and TEMPORARY and it is NOT a penalty. Remember that. :-)
                  The "Google Dance" that a lot of us talk about includes instances where sites get de-indexed temporarily. We're NOT only talking about "bouncing around" in the index itself.

                  If your site is back in the index and your Page Rank has been restored, then this was most likely NOT a "penalty". Why would you get a temporary penalty for doing something naughty?
                  Signature
                  -----------------------------------------


                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892177].message }}
                • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                  Google applied penalties to 2 of my sites pages due to over linking. Simple as that.
                  If that's the way you see it, then there's not much sense discussing it further, really. No one will be able to convince you otherwise.
                  Signature
                  Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
                  FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892183].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                    Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

                    If that's the way you see it, then there's not much sense discussing it further, really. No one will be able to convince you otherwise.
                    I do not need convincing thanks ;-) And forums are here for discussion I thought.

                    Fact: Google has an anti spam team
                    Fact: Google hand reviews websites that trigger alerts (Matt Cutts says so himself in this video)
                    Fact: The Google dance is SERP related and not Toolbar PR
                    Fact: My sites dropped PR days after receiving excessive links

                    Get where I am going here?

                    Fact: Google penalises websites for excessive link spamming.

                    C'mon, of course they do. It's like saying Mice do not like cheese if anyone is saying they do not. Does anyone seriously think that Google are happy for each and every bod to spam the net to manipulate results and are not going to do anything about it?

                    Rly?

                    C'mon!
                    Signature

                    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892213].message }}
                    • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                      I do not need convincing thanks ;-) And forums are here for discussion I thought.

                      Fact: Google has an anti spam team
                      Fact: Google hand reviews websites that trigger alerts (Matt Cutts says so himself in this video)
                      Fact: The Google dance is SERP related and not Toolbar PR
                      Fact: My sites dropped PR days after receiving excessive links

                      Get where I am going here?

                      Fact: Google penalises websites for excessive link spamming.

                      C'mon, of course they do. It's like saying Mice do not like cheese if anyone is saying they do not. Does anyone seriously think that Google are happy for each and every bod to spam the net to manipulate results and are not going to do anything about it?

                      Rly?

                      C'mon!
                      If all this is true, then why did your site come back??? Why did you regain your position and Page Rank after only a couple of weeks?

                      If Google received a "trigger" about your site and a hand-review team looked at it, what made your site come back? Did you promise never to do it again??
                      Signature
                      -----------------------------------------


                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892225].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                        Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

                        If all this is true, then why did your site come back??? Why did you regain your position and Page Rank?

                        If Google received a "trigger" about your site and a hand-review team looked at it, what made your site come back? Did you promise never to do it again??
                        Lolz

                        BECAUSE

                        All the links i gave these sites and pages were from my own sites. I run a network of over 25 franchise websites. I then linked 25 of them to another website with sitewide links. They were legitimate links not spam

                        So after review, it was obvious that this was not link spam.

                        @ Stephen: fine, do not waste your time. ;-) I'm sure you have much better things to do, run along. : - )
                        Signature

                        Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892236].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author bgmacaw
                      Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                      I do not need convincing thanks ;-) And forums are here for discussion I thought.

                      Fact: Google has an anti spam team
                      Fact: Google hand reviews websites that trigger alerts (Matt Cutts says so himself in this video)
                      Fact: The Google dance is SERP related and not Toolbar PR
                      Fact: My sites dropped PR days after receiving excessive links

                      Get where I am going here?

                      Fact: Google penalises websites for excessive link spamming.
                      Unfortunately, you have no idea what real link spamming is. Creating a few 100 measly links won't do a thing so far as the algorithm goes. For real link spamming you'll need to break out a serious blackhat tool and generate 10,000, 20,000 or even 100,000 links virtually overnight. It's these sites that generate alerts and get the attention of the Google spam team.

                      They aren't concerned that Joe Blow's brand new little blog got 200 links this month from a forum signature, 100 from article directories and 100 from a directory submission service. Joe, however, having an overinflated view of his blog, thinks that big bad Google is penalizing his site when his site can't be found in Google due to the typical algorithmic shuffle.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892252].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                        Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                        Unfortunately, you have no idea what real link spamming is. Creating a few 100 measly links won't do a thing so far as the algorithm goes. For real link spamming you'll need to break out a serious blackhat tool and generate 10,000, 20,000 or even 100,000 links virtually overnight. It's these sites that generate alerts and get the attention of the Google spam team.

                        They aren't concerned that Joe Blow's brand new little blog got 200 links this month from a forum signature, 100 from article directories and 100 from a directory submission service. Joe, however, having an overinflated view of his blog, thinks that big bad Google is penalizing his site when his site can't be found in Google due to the typical algorithmic shuffle.
                        Unfortunately you did not read my post fully. 25 sitewide links on pr5/6 websites with minimum 3000 pages each = the top end of the numbers you were suggesting.
                        Signature

                        Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892261].message }}
                        • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                          Unfortunately you did not read my post fully. 25 sitewide links on pr5/6 websites with minimum 3000 pages each = the top end of the numbers you were suggesting.
                          But you said you did 600 links in one night. You did NOT say you did 75,000.

                          Also - I gave an internal page of mine 600+ links in one evening, 2 days later, it went from PR4 to N/R and deindexed. Again, not the Google dance.
                          Even *I* would recommend against 75,000 new links in one day.
                          Signature
                          -----------------------------------------


                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892270].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                            Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

                            But you said you did 600 links in one night. You did NOT say you did 75,000.

                            Scroll up, I did indeed say the number 75,000 ;-)
                            Signature

                            Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892283].message }}
                            • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                              Scroll up, I did indeed say the number 75,000 ;-)
                              Ahhh...yes, I see. But you were talking about site-wide links; where every page picks up the same link, right? I still don't think it was a penalty, since your site came back up.

                              However, if someone uses some sort of software for their site that would generate multiple thousands of links of the same type in one day, they might trigger something that would cause their site to be noticed. But I still don't think normal site-wide type links from your own websites would cause this; I think it's when "black hat" type software is used.
                              Signature
                              -----------------------------------------


                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892322].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                                Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

                                Ahhh...yes, I see. But you were talking about site-wide links; where every page picks up the same link, right? I still don't think it was a penalty, since your site came back up..
                                OK - so you are saying that a page that has never fluctuated before, and had the same page rank and same Google rankings for 2 years, when gaining 75,000 links and dropped all page rank and all rankings, was a natural occurrence?

                                Of course it was a blimin' penalty, it was not a bonus lolz....

                                *sigh*
                                Signature

                                Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892346].message }}
                                • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                                  OK - so you are saying that a page that has never fluctuated before, and had the same page rank and same Google rankings for 2 years, when gaining 75,000 links and dropped all page rank and all rankings, was a natural occurrence?

                                  Of course it was a blimin' penalty, it was not a bonus lolz....

                                  *sigh*
                                  I never said it WAS a bonus. But it's not a penalty, either. It is, like bgmacaw said, an "algorithmic shuffle". I DO believe it's written into the algorithm. But it happens to EVERYBODY, regardless of the speed of building links. That's what I keep saying. It happened to YOU after you built a bunch of links. But it's happened to John and Susan and Thomas and Frank and Tiffany and Jim and dozens and dozens of other people, even though some of them had only built a FEW links in one day.

                                  That's what I've been saying all along...
                                  Signature
                                  -----------------------------------------


                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892384].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                                    Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

                                    But it happens to EVERYBODY, regardless of the speed of building links
                                    OK - I'll put it as simply as I can.

                                    The Toolbar PR dropped from PR4, Page Rank Four, to N/R, Greyed Out.

                                    The Toolbar Update only happens every 3 months. This was not one of those periods.

                                    The "Shuffle" you speak of is for the SERPS. Search Engine Ranking Positions. NOT the Toolbar Page Rank.

                                    I have never seen a Toolbar Page Rank Shuffle. And this was no shuffle, it was a 2 week loss of all Page Rank.

                                    Neither did I get shuffled in the SERPS, I got de-indexed.

                                    Can I spell it out any more clearly?
                                    Signature

                                    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892404].message }}
                                • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                                  OK - so you are saying that a page that has never fluctuated before, and had the same page rank and same Google rankings for 2 years, when gaining 75,000 links and dropped all page rank and all rankings, was a natural occurrence?

                                  Of course it was a blimin' penalty, it was not a bonus lolz....
                                  Did your site come back? If so, it was NOT a penalty. I'm not sure why this isn't clear to you. It can't really be stated any simpler.
                                  Signature
                                  Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
                                  FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892570].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                                    Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

                                    Did your site come back? If so, it was NOT a penalty. I'm not sure why this isn't clear to you. It can't really be stated any simpler.
                                    I stated before why it came back. Much better you read threads fully, with sox on, before posting, please. Thx. Makes you look like an idiot otherwise ;-)

                                    If you ain't got nothin' good to say, don't say it.
                                    Signature

                                    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892591].message }}
                      • Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                        Unfortunately, you have no idea what real link spamming is. Creating a few 100 measly links won't do a thing so far as the algorithm goes. For real link spamming you'll need to break out a serious blackhat tool and generate 10,000, 20,000 or even 100,000 links virtually overnight. It's these sites that generate alerts and get the attention of the Google spam team.

                        They aren't concerned that Joe Blow's brand new little blog got 200 links this month from a forum signature, 100 from article directories and 100 from a directory submission service. Joe, however, having an overinflated view of his blog, thinks that big bad Google is penalizing his site when his site can't be found in Google due to the typical algorithmic shuffle.
                        I couldn't have said it better, myself.
                        Signature
                        -----------------------------------------


                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892266].message }}
                      • Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                        Unfortunately, you have no idea what real link spamming is. Creating a few 100 measly links won't do a thing so far as the algorithm goes. For real link spamming you'll need to break out a serious blackhat tool and generate 10,000, 20,000 or even 100,000 links virtually overnight. It's these sites that generate alerts and get the attention of the Google spam team.

                        They aren't concerned that Joe Blow's brand new little blog got 200 links this month from a forum signature, 100 from article directories and 100 from a directory submission service. Joe, however, having an overinflated view of his blog, thinks that big bad Google is penalizing his site when his site can't be found in Google due to the typical algorithmic shuffle.
                        Extremely well said, and completely correct. Several hundred links added in a day is nothing, that happens legitimately every single day.
                        Signature
                        Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
                        FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892288].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                          Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

                          Extremely well said, and completely correct. Several hundred links added in a day is nothing, that happens legitimately every single day.
                          No not completely correct i'm afraid. Partially correct perhaps for an established website with a consistent pattern of inbound links. But not completely correct for a new site with little or no inbounds.
                          Signature

                          Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892353].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author DeborahDera
                  Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                  ok - lets put it this way.

                  I gave 1 website which was 2 years old and had no backlink building done for it, 25 sitewide links on pr5 and pr6 sites. This contributed some 75,000 + links to it overnight. It got de-indexed and it's it's PR nulled. That is not the Google dance. That is Google saying WTF.

                  Also - I gave an internal page of mine 600+ links in one evening, 2 days later, it went from PR4 to N/R and deindexed. Again, not the Google dance.

                  The Google dance generally happens when an update is done and all the datacentres are busy rejigging the update and collating their databases.

                  It can also happen when different datacentres are receiving different volumes of links and giving differing results when people search. One search may show you at #3, another at #14, depending on which datacentre is reporting back.

                  3 things happened which make me KNOW it was a penalty and not the Google Dance.

                  1. The Page Rank dropped also. PR is only updated around once every 3 months and has nothing to do with the Google dance what-so-ever.

                  2. My pages got de-indexed. They did not "dance" they vanished.

                  3. Both 1 and 2 co-incided with massive links being pointed to both pages.

                  Please Angela, I know my websites very well, i also know what I do to promote them. It is all very well you reposting stuff about algorithm's and analogies into what you think Google does but that does not reflect on my experience in this matter. Google applied penalties to 2 of my sites pages due to over linking. Simple as that.
                  Hi. I'm just trying to follow this thread and understand what everyone is saying. Could you elaborate on if and when your sites were reindexed?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2682766].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author sarah.kerr
              The best way to avoid getting banned is to follow the rules of the website you are posting. It is still best to respect their policies.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2906151].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author MA SEO
            Hi Angela, I added 300 links in the space of 4 days using pauls and your packages using 4 different anchor keywords.

            Would this be seen as spammy by google?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1423060].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
              Originally Posted by Muz Azar View Post

              Hi Angela, I added 300 links in the space of 4 days using pauls and your packages using 4 different anchor keywords.

              Would this be seen as spammy by google?
              No worries mate, I do this all the time. Sometimes I get the dance, sometimes I don't.

              As far as I know, nobody has their greasy paws on the Google algo, so we're all just guessing. Some more educated guesses than others, but nobody can say squat with certainty.
              Signature
              Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1428404].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author felixalbutra
            Is Angela's back links are reliable?
            Signature
            Affliate links are not allowed.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209535].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dvduval
    Let me just make one general comment...

    Let's suppose you are a google employee doing a manual review of a website, and you pull up a list of clickable urls of all the links pointing to the website. What will you find?

    Will you find that there is a large volume of quality links?
    Or will you find something that seems odd or of low quality?

    I don't know much about Angela's Backlinks, though I would probably be willing to try it and give my review, so feel free to PM me Angela, and also Angela, it might be cool to think about including some one-way directory links in your services if you haven't already. We have consistently found that backlinks from directories, even small ones, can help considerably in building rankings.
    Signature
    It is okay to contact me! I have been developing software since 1999, creating many popular products like phpLD.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891532].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author The Expert
      I saw this exact warning message on that site when I was making my second round of backlinks for a site I am promoting.

      Didn't phase me too much, I just didn't drop the link on that site anymore. If they have made it their own personal war to keep people from posting links on their site in any way/shape/form then let them have it.

      I remember Angela saying that she has sites for packets already stacked for a few months...so there will be more where that came from. If you get Paul's links as well then I don't think you'll have anything to worry about.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891559].message }}
  • The supplemental index was merged into the regular index a long time ago, so those codes / operators don't work anymore.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891595].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author boris s
      Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      The supplemental index was merged into the regular index a long time ago, so those codes / operators don't work anymore.
      thanks Steve ; so how can i check the supplemental index ?
      Signature

      Drague et seduction, comment draguer une fille sur www.Artdeseduire.com

      Webmarketing et productivité pour les entrepreneurs

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891631].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      The supplemental index was merged into the regular index a long time ago, so those codes / operators don't work anymore.
      Can you explain when this happened?
      Signature
      Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
      FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891815].message }}
  • It's gone - it was merged in - just like when I merge my tomatoes with lime juice making salsa - it's not feasible to get back the original data. There are ways to guess if it is there, but the concept is not really viable anymore, so I wouldn't be trying to figure it out as there isn't much of value to be gained.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[891684].message }}
  • Hi Stephen,

    The supplemental index was merged into the main index over a year ago. I think there is something about it on Stompernet. However Stephen if you can point us to an operator to get to it, please let us know as that would help.

    I don't seem to be the only one who think's the supplemental has popped it's cloggs:

    http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...tml#post891769

    As for excessive back linking it can trigger the sandbox - I would have thought most people know that.

    Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and I'm just giving mine.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892056].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      As for excessive back linking it can trigger the sandbox - I would have thought most people know that.
      There's a lot of mis-information and bad assumptions among most people.
      Signature
      Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
      FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892070].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sagasu44
      Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      Hi Stephen,

      The supplemental index was merged into the main index over a year ago. I think there is something about it on Stompernet. However Stephen if you can point us to an operator to get to it, please let us know as that would help.

      I don't seem to be the only one who think's the supplemental has popped it's cloggs:.
      I think this actually came from the horses mouth in the interview between Matt Cutts and Stephan Spencer which Angela has a link to in her monthly packages. Though I can't remember if Stephan said it had indeed popped it's clogs or was heading that way. You might want to have a listen if you haven't already.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892807].message }}
      • Originally Posted by sagasu44 View Post

        I think this actually came from the horses mouth in the interview between Matt Cutts and Stephan Spencer which Angela has a link to in her monthly packages. Though I can't remember if Stephan said it had indeed popped it's clogs or was heading that way. You might want to have a listen if you haven't already.
        Actually, the label has been removed from the "supplemental index" but there is still a mechanism for segregation.
        Signature
        Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
        FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892814].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author SMS
          I think this is absolutely spot on. From the extensive experiments I've done, I think the supplemental index still exists, but probably doesn't operate the way most people think it does.

          BTW, guys 'n gals can we keep this thread civil, please?

          Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

          Actually, the label has been removed from the "supplemental index" but there is still a mechanism for segregation.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893774].message }}
  • Hi Steven you seem a little short in your answers? A little more than one liners would be helpful as if you know something about links it would be useful to let the rest of us know if that's ok? This is an issue a lot of people struggle with.

    . I've triggered the sandbox in the past by two things - too much content too fast and too many links in too short a space of time. At least that's how I've seen it, what triggers it in your experience?

    No one wants to get stuck in the sandbox so the more we can do to avoid it the better.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892074].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn View Post

      Hi Steven you seem a little short in your answers? A little more than one liners would be helpful as if you know something about links it would be useful to let the rest of us know if that's ok? This is an issue a lot of people struggle with.
      Google removed the LABEL from supplemental results, but that doesn't mean that they don't continue to segregate pages within sites. It may be referred to in different terms, but the fact is that while the distinction has narrowed, there is still a distinction.

      In July of 2007 Google announced that the supplemental index went, in their words, "mainstream". The "mainstreaming" of the supplemental index was in removing the public label, but not the underlying process.
      Signature
      Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
      FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892137].message }}
  • Exactly, Steven. And even then, Google would have to investigate the reported violation as it most likely receives a lot of frivolous "reports" from sites who are competing with other sites.
    Signature
    -----------------------------------------


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892132].message }}
  • Hi Steven,

    I would totally agree with that - but I've felt that concept was not worth worrying about if we can't investigate it. How can we access or view the supplemental index or check if we are within it?

    Do you feel the supplemental index is an issue we can do anything about or is a threat?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892139].message }}
  • Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892146].message }}
  • Hi Francis,

    That trigger isn't human intervention, it's just a case of going over a threshold I guess.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892148].message }}
  • Hi Steven,

    That's great! Thanks!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892151].message }}
  • Like I said, you're entitled to your opinion and no one will be able to convince you otherwise, so there's no sense in me wasting my time on it.
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892224].message }}
  • Angela:

    Sites that are legitimately penalized by Google do not "come back" on their own. The problem has to be corrected. There is a mechanism for that within Google and it requires active intervention from the site owner.
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892232].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

      Angela:

      Sites that are legitimately penalized by Google do not "come back" on their own. The problem has to be corrected. There is a mechanism for that within Google and it requires active intervention from the site owner.
      Exactly. Quite a few people have seen this "deindexed" thing, only to find their site BACK in the index a short time later. It's very, very common and although I suspect it's something to do with the algorithm, I don't believe it's a penalty.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892257].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
    OK - I think maybe people are getting the wrong idea here

    I at no point said anyone will get penalised for gaining a few hundred backlinks. I simply said 2 pages of mine DID get penalised for gaining up to 75,000 backlinks, proving there are such things as penalties.

    I was also refuting that the drop in rankings was due to the Google Dance. Which it was obviously not as the Google Dance does not affect toolbar PR

    Keep up folks and read threads fully ;-)
    Signature

    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892278].message }}
  • So to summarise, Steven and Angela are saying that the average person can't get sandboxed and doesn't need to worry about it. (I have but I understand why and it was my fault). The most that can happen is an algorithmic shuffle?

    It seems like you are both making a pretty definitive statement and your saying franchise has misunderstood what has happened to his website?

    Franchiseshop - did your links still show in webmaster tools - that is an easy way to see if you have been deindexed versus a shuffle as your indexed pages still display regardless of SERPS or pagerank.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892430].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
    I did check webmaster tools and no, nothing. Not even a page mention nevermind links.
    Signature

    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892449].message }}
  • We understand that you THINK that Google reviewed your website and let you come back. That's fine; people think Google does a LOT of things to their websites. This is common thinking for webmasters. People think Google is a Zeus in the sky, waiting to strike us dead at the slightest variation from the "rules".

    If the SAME 25 links went out over 3000 pages, that's NOT the same thing as 75,000 DIFFERENT links. Having the same link appear on all pages of a website is VERY common and happens all over the Internet.

    Take this site, for instance. At the bottom of EVERY post are some icons so that you can "social bookmark" the post. How many pages do you think THIS site has? What about all the other THOUSANDS (maybe HUNDREDS of thousands) of sites that have the same icons on every page? Do you seriously think that this triggered some sort of "red flag" in Google and Google had to manually review EVERY SITE that carries these icons or the Social Bookmarking Sites were going to be de-indexed? After all, many of these Social Bookmarking sites are well established sites like you say yours is.
    Signature
    -----------------------------------------


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892709].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

      We understand that you THINK that Google reviewed your website and let you come back.
      Angela, I think this is a lost cause. Despite his rather rude response, the fact is that I know exactly what he's stated here. And again, he did NOT receive a penalty. I'm not sure why that's not sinking in for him, but it just isn't.

      It cannot be any more clear: sites that receive and actual penalty from Google don't come back on their own. Period. Sites that actually RECEIVE a penalty do not get restored to pre-penalty status without remediation from the site owner.

      I don't hold out any hope that he's going to get this, but there it is.
      Signature
      Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
      FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892784].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
        Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

        Angela, I think this is a lost cause. Despite his rather rude response, the fact is that I know exactly what he's stated here. And again, he did NOT receive a penalty. I'm not sure why that's not sinking in for him, but it just isn't.

        It cannot be any more clear: sites that receive and actual penalty from Google don't come back on their own. Period. Sites that actually RECEIVE a penalty do not get restored to pre-penalty status without remediation from the site owner.

        I don't hold out any hope that he's going to get this, but there it is.
        I could argue the point with you all night long Steven but it would be like trying to get a woodworm to eat a brick. It's blindingly obvious you have not even followed the thread/posts and seem to enjoy adding your 2 cents worth in on every third sentence you read, just to try and manipulate things to saddle up with your basic knowledge of SEO. Lets look at it this way. A n00b is always a n00b no matter how many fancy bricks he eats. Sore teeth yet? Munch Crunch.

        Give it a break please, my ears and eyes are starting to hurt with the pain of reading your responses and speaking them out-load in disbelief masked in frustration is causing me terrible anguish, and as much as I am trying not too, yes you are beginning to annoy the shit outa me.

        The facts are plain and simple; if they are beyond your comprehension then you not only need to see a doctor but probably need to go back to school.

        I'm done with explaining the simple to you, it's obviously beyond your basic; food, sleep, eat. Here, have another brick. Chomp chomp.

        Cheerzo :-)

        P.S. Forums are great for discussion, also advice. Do try not to ruin good advice/and/or ignore facts as it ruins it for every one else new to the scene and looking for good pointers. Misinformation is not a good thing and you are only contributing to already well known bollocks.

        P.P.S I expect you read that as: "Whoa there dude, INSPIRATION or what man." Munch Munch. Here, have another brick. :-)
        Signature

        Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892803].message }}
        • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

          I'm done with explaining the simple to you, it's obviously beyond your basic; food, sleep, eat. Here, have another brick.
          I think that's wise on your part. You're on the wrong end of the facts here, and retreat is the best option at this point. The simple fact is, a fact you appear to be unable to grasp, is that you didn't get penalized by Google. Actual Google penalties don't "magically disappear" on their own.

          I've done my best to educate you on the matter, but if you choose not to learn, I can't help you any further.
          Signature
          Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
          FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892821].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
            Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

            I think that's wise on your part. You're on the wrong end of the facts here, and retreat is the best option at this point. The simple fact is, a fact you appear to be unable to grasp, is that you didn't get penalized by Google. Actual Google penalties don't "magically disappear" on their own.

            I've done my best to educate you on the matter, but if you choose not to learn, I can't help you any further.
            It's OK stephen. But lets put a few facts into consideration. I have a network of over 25 websites, most of them pr5 - pr6 and generatng a mass of several million pounds per year profit (not turnover). All of this obtained through my SEO expertise.

            You have a site with NO PR in your sig, gaining a bare handful of visitors per day by the looks of your Alexa ranking, and somehow you are the expert?

            Lets see:

            Me, Millionaire.

            You? 15 visitors per day.

            It is only advice but I really do recommend people listen to my advice and not that of some young guy with little to no experience.
            Signature

            Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892841].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author bgmacaw
              Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

              gaining a bare handful of visitors per day by the looks of your Alexa ranking
              That you give any value at all to Alexa ranking indicates a lot about your knowledge level in these matters.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892849].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                That you give any value at all to Alexa ranking indicates a lot about your knowledge level in these matters.
                Sigh....

                And that comment shows yours. (lack of)

                Alexa is not accurate, we all know that and you have obviously read it somewhere. (seo for beginners) But being able to take those statistics and use them in real life is where the trick comes in.

                For example: Stevens link is shown in a forum that has probably got a higher % of Alexa toolbar installs per user than your average user. So, having an alexa raking of 3 million + like Steven has shows that it is likely his site is slightly more inflated in alexa ranking than your normal website. I would rank a normal 3 million alexa ranked website as having anywhere between 10-60 visit per day, but as Steven is a user of here, I would bring that down to around 10-30. Hence my prediction of around 15.

                Sorry, but your comment goes to show that you do not know how to use these tools to your advantage, try again. ;-)
                Signature

                Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892857].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author bgmacaw
                  Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

                  Sigh....

                  And that comment shows yours. (lack of)

                  Alexa is not accurate, we all know that and you have obviously read it somewhere. (seo for beginners) But being able to take those statistics and use them in real life is where the trick comes in.
                  I ought to just let folks like you spout this nonsense and not say anything or just pop in with a cryptic comment like Blackhatcat does. Having people believe this incorrect info works to my advantage after all.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893029].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                    Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                    I ought to just let folks like you spout this nonsense and not say anything or just pop in with a cryptic comment like Blackhatcat does. Having people believe this incorrect info works to my advantage after all.
                    That would be fine if you included an explanation. I'm afraid one liners with nothing to back it up does not cut the mustard.

                    Awaiting your experienced opinion on Alexa rankings ;-) How it works, what the variations are and why people should not use them.

                    Please give me some examples. For instance, would you say it was possible for a website to have an Alexa ranking of 3 million and gain 1000 visitors per day, and for someone to have an Alexa ranking of 12,000 and have 100 visitors per day?

                    Both are possible, just unlikely statistically. It is all very well saying "me come from cave, light fire, not believe in Alexa" but back your sh*t up dude :-D
                    Signature

                    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893054].message }}
              • Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                That you give any value at all to Alexa ranking indicates a lot about your knowledge level in these matters.
                Not to worry bgmacaw, the guy has been exposed. If he were smart, he'd happily accept the free education he's been given.
                Signature
                Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
                FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892889].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Saidar
                  Franchiseshop dude, please stop being rude. I'm sure you have a lot of things better to do, why do you even bother arguing with Steven? By flashing your income on public forums really shows a lack of self confidence and self respect. I'm 21 and even I know this, really. It's unprofessional.

                  I really enjoyed the conversation here but everyone really stop being childish.

                  Now, back to the conversation...

                  Maybe Google does have a manual review team, nobody knows. But for them to review Mr. Franchise' network of 25 websites within two weeks is not probable. That manual review team would have thousands and thousands of sites to review, so I think the list would be at least a few months long.

                  Obviously something happened,and to tell the truth, any good programmer with advanced knowledge of statistics and numerical mathematics would know that writing algorithms that can detect abnormal link building patterns and spamming can be detected by laser accuracy if enough computational power is available combined with the right experimental empirical data.

                  From my knowledge, Google has unlimited funds and thousands of Nerds working for them, so I'm sure they have figured all of this out in the last 8 years.

                  So just maybe Franchise' site was put through a spam algorithm that took a while to update his site (because of the thousands of instant links) That would be the logical answer to me.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[896040].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
                    Originally Posted by Saidar View Post

                    Franchiseshop dude, please stop being rude. I'm sure you have a lot of things better to do, why do you even bother arguing with Steven? By flashing your income on public forums really shows a lack of self confidence and self respect. I'm 21 and even I know this, really. It's unprofessional.
                    ????

                    Seriously, it is obvious I was pissed off last night so why come on and bring it up again? However now you have, if people are going to half read threads and post comments on topics they know nothing about, continue to do so and continue to spread mi information to the detriment of others around them, then yeah, i'll happily get pissed off and rant.

                    Geddit? Please do not tell me i have no self respect, that I have plenty of, unlike a few I can think of.

                    :-)
                    Signature

                    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[896071].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author ryandales2000
                      Just to clarify: I made an earlier post where I said that "personally I never thought that I was ripped off by Angela" as I am a satisfied subscriber of hers and I even wrote that of all the WSO's I bought, her WSO is still the best so far, especially considering the $5 price. That was my opinion then and it is still my opinion now and I intend to be a subscriber of Angela's for a long time.

                      My purpose of this post is to get your opinions on the increasing difficulty of placing those links. I am not declaring the end of Angela's backlinks that is why I placed a question mark at the end of the title. I am just worried, and wondering, and asking...and not declaring about the end of Angela's backlinks.

                      I'm sorry Angela if this thread offended you. I never intended to.
                      Signature

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[897460].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Ryan6
                Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

                That you give any value at all to Alexa ranking indicates a lot about your knowledge level in these matters.
                I think it is perfectly acceptable that he users Alexa. Authority sites always study Alexa rankings when they weigh up or value a smaller site. It's the same with Google Analytics, all the big sites use it, but it has always been prone to errors. With all the ad, cookie and JavaScipt blocking these days, it's pretty much impossible to generate true accurate global stats. The fact is that Alexa is always chosen ahead of Compete, ComScore, Hitwise, Quantcast and so on - so I'd say he's using the best source tbh.
                Signature
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892958].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
      lolz. You would argue that a back end of a cow doesnt produce shit.

      I give up. Is there an "experts" room here somewhere?
      Signature

      Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892797].message }}
      • Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

        lolz. You would argue that a back end of a cow doesnt produce shit.
        Actually, there are some that do not. In fact, many thousands and perhaps millions. That's a fact, just like the fact that you didn't get a penalty from Google.

        Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

        I give up.
        I'm thinking that's your best move.

        Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

        Is there an "experts" room here somewhere?
        Yes there is. When you attain expert level knowledge, you can apply to get in there with us.
        Signature
        Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
        FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892810].message }}
  • Since you've chosen to go down that road...

    *** EDITED TO REMOVE MY LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS ***
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892885].message }}
  • My apologies to the forum for allowing myself to be drawn down to his level and to become a part of his p-ing contest. Usually I avoid it, but this guy was too persistent. Now that he's been pegged, I'll offer my sincere apology and let him off the hook for further free education and allow him to persist in his error.
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892894].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Saidar
      Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

      My apologies to the forum for allowing myself to be drawn down to his level and to become a part of his p-ing contest. Usually I avoid it, but this guy was too persistent. Now that he's been pegged, I'll offer my sincere apology and let him off the hook for further free education and allow him to persist in his error.
      "TO PERSIST IN HIS ERROR"

      Steven, I do have a lot of respect for you, but that statement was absolutely ignorant.

      If you don't have the Google algorithms in your possession then there will always be room for error. Just maybe YOUare wrong, and then what?

      If you have data to to prove him wrong share it with us. That is one thing that lacks on this forum, 99% of case studies done here no one shows proof. Only speculation
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[896054].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
    lolz.

    I do not believe a word you say. Why should I?

    Your link text is: "Here's a SECRET STASH of copyright-free, high-quality content you can use for any purpose"

    And after all that work experience, now at 47, this is the best you could do? This is it, the pinnacle of your career at 15 web visits per day you now sell content that anyone can use? Useless rubbish in other words.

    Seriously, I am happy for people to mull along and do the best they can. But please, please, stop with the semi read thread but ins and I won't go so personal.

    Every one does what they do but if you are trying to tell me that what you have said tonight you preach to clients then you are guilty of making a mess of the web. And whilst we are at it, you coded what in what language exactly? I have a great team of coders who work with me, maybe with your experience in the industry you could give them a hand with a few issues? :-)

    lolz at your apology, people with half a brain only need read the thread to realise you gave it nothing of substance so stop with your creepy nonsense.
    Signature

    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[892924].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
    Thank you Ryan, someone who reads threads, now there is a rarity. ;-)

    Alexa is not accurate as we all know, however under the 100k mark is does start to get fairly accurate which is when it comes into it's own. There are a lot of hobbiest SEO people out there who dismiss it but the fact is it is a tool and with all tools they need used correctly. It's all way to easy to say "Hah, alexa, it is inaccurate" but the end result is that the person saying that have usually read it somewhere and are simply repeating the fact, the same with a lot of the myths repeated in this thread.

    This is forum full of SEO pro's I would love to see a few more of them jump on this thread to back me up, otherwise I'll have to start posting links to the real deal ;-) Mis information in forums like these ain't a good thing as it spreads like an infection....
    Signature

    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893015].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ripsnorta2
    Looks like this conversation has degenerated into a who's naughty bits are bigger type of deal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893018].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
      Originally Posted by ripsnorta2 View Post

      Looks like this conversation has degenerated into a who's naughty bits are bigger type of deal.
      Then act as moderator, take an hour and read through it all and put us all in our places, teacher. ;-)
      Signature

      Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893024].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ripsnorta2
        Originally Posted by franchiseshop View Post

        Then act as moderator, take an hour and read through it all and put us all in our places, teacher. ;-)
        Wow. You are a troll.

        I was thinking that you honestly believed what you were saying, but with a response like that...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893037].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author franchiseshop
    lolz. Trolling would be posting to inflame, I think you will find I was on the defence. ;-) trolling also adds no valuable input where as what I have said is factually correct. Hard not to seem like trolling when talking to people with their own agendas..

    Any way, ta for the perspective.
    Signature

    Matthew Anderson | Haggis McTavish | Wapigs | Aobuluz

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893113].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author anth.elias
      Wow nice post..I'm taking all the content and putting it in a ebook may even an audio book and selling it for $47- no just kidding.

      Bottom line is we are going to what we want to do- and we all learn from are mistakes, yes too many backlinks too fast will make the Google algorithm take a back step, that step is already programed. Right Google is the god of SE..show Google love by playing fair and Google will show you love back. What is fair is too me may not be fair for someone else. SEO is always changing and you have to change right along with it or you will get left behind.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893179].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ryandales2000
        Ceasefire and peace to everybody.

        I am the Original Poster and I think this thread has degenerated so badly.

        Peace...Peace...Peace..And please can we return to the question of this thread? If you have nothing to add that is relevant to this thread please do not post.. Thank you very much everybody for all your contributions..
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[893479].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Johnson
    Originally Posted by ryandales2000 View Post

    I am a subscriber of Angela's backlinks-packet. I was about to register at The Netscape Unofficial FAQ when I read this! I am afraid that this is the beginning of the end for this type of link-building. What do you Warriors think?

    No Free Advertising - ATTENTION SPAMLINKERS The Netscape Unofficial FAQ does not allow FREE advertising. Posting an ad-link (commercial) in our forums,in a signature or anywhere in your profile information, etc., is strictly prohibited and will lead to termination of account and removal of the post that includes the link. If you wish to advertise on The Netscape Unofficial FAQ or do not understand this policiy, please contact The Webmaster for more information and/or rates. Also note that any user violating this agreement and the account terminated will be listed in our forum for all to see. Your IP and domain will also be listed on several of the major BlackLists such as SpamCop and Spamhaus..

    A violation of the above "No Free Advertising" will result in the forfeiture of your private data as well as posting your violation on our public forum.


    Also Note: If you purchased a 30-site list from ANGELA EDWARDS at angelasdiscountmarket, you got ripped off. Do not even THINK about attempting to post a link in our forum as you may be included in legal action.



    No offense, but this thread title is very offensive and disrespectful to Angela and her WSO, if you have a questions regarding her packets fine, but you shouldn’t claim that her packets are finished because of a few site that don’t work.

    I’ve been a long time subscriber of Angela’s packets and she has provided more value with her $5 packets than I have ever received from any company or service I’ve used in the past.

    There is literally hundreds of millions of high page rank sites on the internet, so there is no way that Angela’s packets will ever end. Just do the math, if even 90% of all same type of sites that Angela uses in her packets stop letting you put links on their sites, she would still have enough sites to provide us forever, not to mention that there is literally hundreds of thousands of new high ranking sites added every month.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[894446].message }}
    • Originally Posted by Chris Johnson View Post

      No offense, but this thread title is very offensive and disrespectful to Angela and her WSO, if you have a questions regarding her packets fine, but you shouldn’t claim that her packets are finished because of a few site that don’t work.

      I’ve been a long time subscriber of Angela’s packets and she has provided more value with her $5 packets than I have ever received from any company or service I’ve used in the past.

      There is literally hundreds of millions of high page rank sites on the internet, so there is no way that Angela’s packets will ever end. Just do the math, if even 90% of all same type of sites that Angela uses in her packets stop letting you put links on their sites, she would still have enough sites to provide us forever, not to mention that there is literally hundreds of thousands of new high ranking sites added every month.
      Thank you very much for this post, Chris. You're right; there is NO WAY I am ever going to run out of great sites to put into the packets.

      For the folks that get upset about a few sites that don't allow links anymore...first of all, that is bound to happen with a site or two in the packets. I've completely removed all "comment" type sites, so this will be a minimum, as the spammers can't do too much damage.

      Think of it this way: If a friend came to you and said he knew of a Page Rank 8 site, four page rank 7 sites, and six Page Rank 6 sites that you could get a backlink from, would you be willing to pay him $5 for it? Of course you would! That would be a steal! And that's for just 11 great sites! Think back to the old days of IM, when you had to find your OWN backlinks and they were USUALLY some blog you had to make a comment on. $5 for what your friend is offering to you is well worth it. Yet, people start to grumble when one or two sites in the packet don't work anymore. Some people stop using the program altogether. Even though they have more than 25 great, usable, High Page Rank sites from PR 6 all the way to PR 10 at times. This is something I don't really understand.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895073].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author SMS
        For some people, the glass will always be half empty. Such people will always exist... there's nothing that you or I can do about them.

        I'm sure the vast majority appreciate the great value in your package, Angela. For them, the glass is 99% full .


        Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

        Thank you very much for this post, Chris. You're right; there is NO WAY I am ever going to run out of great sites to put into the packets.

        For the folks that get upset about a few sites that don't allow links anymore...first of all, that is bound to happen with a site or two in the packets. I've completely removed all "comment" type sites, so this will be a minimum, as the spammers can't do too much damage.

        Think of it this way: If a friend came to you and said he knew of a Page Rank 8 site, four page rank 7 sites, and six Page Rank 6 sites that you could get a backlink from, would you be willing to pay him $5 for it? Of course you would! That would be a steal! And that's for just 11 great sites! Think back to the old days of IM, when you had to find your OWN backlinks and they were USUALLY some blog you had to make a comment on. $5 for what your friend is offering to you is well worth it. Yet, people start to grumble when one or two sites in the packet don't work anymore. Some people stop using the program altogether. Even though they have more than 25 great, usable, High Page Rank sites from PR 6 all the way to PR 10 at times. This is something I don't really understand.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895108].message }}
        • Originally Posted by SMS View Post

          For some people, the glass will always be half empty. Such people will always exist... there's nothing that you or I can do about them.

          I'm sure the vast majority appreciate the great value in your package, Angela. For them, the glass is 99% full .
          Yep, you are right. Good point.
          Signature
          -----------------------------------------


          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895154].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whmarketer
    Yes that's right, a blank page.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[894593].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author SMS
      Do you mind revealing what keyword it's ranking for. No probs if you'd rather not... I fully understand .

      Originally Posted by whmarketer View Post

      Yes that's right, a blank page.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[894808].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author whmarketer
        Originally Posted by SMS View Post

        Do you mind revealing what keyword it's ranking for. No probs if you'd rather not... I fully understand .
        Id rather not reveal the site/keyword as I intend to put some content on it in the near future.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[894843].message }}
  • Angela:

    You don't need to defend your product, believe me the value is incredible. Like I said, I receive your packet and I can just turn it over to an hourly staffer to handle without any instruction at all.
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895097].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rtrotter
    What got me thinking in the Netscape post was their reporting to Blacklist like SpamCop and Spamhaus. Made my question if Google actually spiders those site as a source for "bad neighborhoods" and if so would it impact ranking.

    In regard to issue of supplemental index, it is gone as a hack search in Google but there is a way to get an idea of the pages on your site that are in it. When you do a site: search in Google and you get a click to get more results at the end, it is those pages that show, when you click, that are probably in supplemental index.

    Rodney
    Signature

    Ping All Your Feed On Auto-Pilot
    www.kping.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895124].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author SMS
      The supplemental index for want of a better phrase is not site/domain specific. There's lots of empirical evidence that proves this.

      Originally Posted by rtrotter View Post

      What got me thinking in the Netscape post was their reporting to Blacklist like SpamCop and Spamhaus. Made my question if Google actually spiders those site as a source for "bad neighborhoods" and if so would it impact ranking.

      In regard to issue of supplemental index, it is gone as a hack search in Google but there is a way to get an idea of the pages on your site that are in it. When you do a site: search in Google and you get a click to get more results at the end, it is those pages that show, when you click, that are probably in supplemental index.

      Rodney
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895150].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author rtrotter
        Originally Posted by SMS View Post

        The supplemental index for want of a better phrase is not site/domain specific. There's lots of empirical evidence that proves this.
        Of course it is not site/domain specific, but if you want to find your pages in it, that is how it can be done.

        Rodney
        Signature

        Ping All Your Feed On Auto-Pilot
        www.kping.com

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895206].message }}
    • Originally Posted by rtrotter View Post

      What got me thinking in the Netscape post was their reporting to Blacklist like SpamCop and Spamhaus. Made my question if Google actually spiders those site as a source for "bad neighborhoods" and if so would it impact ranking.
      Rodney
      If that were the case, then people would be "reporting" their competitors ALL OVER THE INTERNET. Can you imagine the mayhem? Google would cease to be the Google we know today and it would lose it's BILLION dollar a year position as the leader in the industry.

      Netscape "reported" me because I linked to my Angela page (which as absolutely NOTHING to buy on it; it's a personal, "about me" page) and my backlinks article. That was the extent of my "spamming".
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895151].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author rtrotter
        Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

        If that were the case, then people would be "reporting" their competitors ALL OVER THE INTERNET. Can you imagine the mayhem? Google would cease to be the Google we know today and it would lose it's BILLION dollar a year position as the leader in the industry.

        Netscape "reported" me because I linked to my Angela page (which as absolutely NOTHING to buy on it; it's a personal, "about me" page) and my backlinks article. That was the extent of my "spamming".
        Yea Angela, that's the conclusion I came to also. Went I have these crazy ideas I try to ask myself "if tru could it be used against me?" and I assume Google will not let that happen.

        Rodney
        Signature

        Ping All Your Feed On Auto-Pilot
        www.kping.com

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895194].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author zoobie
    many of the Angela's link in the past are in forums, or blog comments whatever... But simply these leads to link spamming... So I don't encourage to signing up with this kind of link building programs.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895168].message }}
    • Originally Posted by zoobie View Post

      many of the Angela's link in the past are in forums, or blog comments whatever... But simply these leads to link spamming... So I don't encourage to signing up with this kind of link building programs.
      Yes, you are exactly right. That's why I have completely removed those type.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[895199].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author askloz
    ROTFLMAO, I was waiting for the day for this to happen.

    I don't mean that in a bad way, I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But, must say, I could see this happening. So now, Angela has to find a new method / sources to get links from. And so does everyone else. And unfortunately, those who were not on Angela's list to receive these backlink lists, all has been ruined for a deed initially in good spirit has been ruined.

    And my members wonder why I don't give out my 3000+ places to post out to.

    Let this be a lesson to anyone who wants to boast where they are getting their links from. If you want to ruin your business, let the whole world know where you're getting the links.

    Links should be kept to yourself and treated as Gold dust.

    Originally Posted by ryandales2000 View Post

    I am a subscriber of Angela's backlinks-packet. I was about to register at The Netscape Unofficial FAQ when I read this! I am afraid that this is the beginning of the end for this type of link-building. What do you Warriors think?

    No Free Advertising - ATTENTION SPAMLINKERS
    The Netscape Unofficial FAQ does not allow FREE advertising. Posting an ad-link (commercial) in our forums,in a signature or anywhere in your profile information, etc., is strictly prohibited and will lead to termination of account and removal of the post that includes the link. If you wish to advertise on The Netscape Unofficial FAQ or do not understand this policiy, please contact The Webmaster for more information and/or rates. Also note that any user violating this agreement and the account terminated will be listed in our forum for all to see. Your IP and domain will also be listed on several of the major BlackLists such as SpamCop and Spamhaus..

    A violation of the above "No Free Advertising" will result in the forfeiture of your private data as well as posting your violation on our public forum.


    Also Note: If you purchased a 30-site list from ANGELA EDWARDS at angelasdiscountmarket, you got ripped off. Do not even THINK about attempting to post a link in our forum as you may be included in legal action.



    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[897550].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author rtrotter
      Originally Posted by askloz View Post

      ROTFLMAO, I was waiting for the day for this to happen.

      I don't mean that in a bad way, I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But, must say, I could see this happening. So now, Angela has to find a new method / sources to get links from. And so does everyone else. And unfortunately, those who were not on Angela's list to receive these backlink lists, all has been ruined for a deed initially in good spirit has been ruined.

      And my members wonder why I don't give out my 3000+ places to post out to.

      Let this be a lesson to anyone who wants to boast where they are getting their links from. If you want to ruin your business, let the whole world know where you're getting the links.

      Links should be kept to yourself and treated as Gold dust.
      How in the world do you keep where your getting links to yourself? Think - Yahoo SiteExplorer.

      Rodney
      Signature

      Ping All Your Feed On Auto-Pilot
      www.kping.com

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[897754].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author discrat
      Originally Posted by askloz View Post

      ROTFLMAO, I was waiting for the day for this to happen.

      I don't mean that in a bad way, I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But, must say, I could see this happening. So now, Angela has to find a new method / sources to get links from. And so does everyone else. And unfortunately, those who were not on Angela's list to receive these backlink lists, all has been ruined for a deed initially in good spirit has been ruined.

      And my members wonder why I don't give out my 3000+ places to post out to.

      Let this be a lesson to anyone who wants to boast where they are getting their links from. If you want to ruin your business, let the whole world know where you're getting the links.

      Links should be kept to yourself and treated as Gold dust.

      Oh gawd, not this luny tune guy again. I thought his chauvenistic behind was outta here already !!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[984111].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author visit_faraz
    Hey,
    I dont think having one link gone bad among a hundred makes that much of a difference.
    I have seen that before and just got on with it.
    Maybe one link has gone bad, but the others are really worth it.

    just my 2 cents.
    Faraz
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[897766].message }}
    • Originally Posted by visit_faraz View Post

      Hey,
      I dont think having one link gone bad among a hundred makes that much of a difference.
      I have seen that before and just got on with it.
      Maybe one link has gone bad, but the others are really worth it.

      just my 2 cents.
      Faraz
      Yep, that's what I think, too, Faraz. I am actually quite puzzled why Askloz thinks "Angela has to find a new method / sources to get links from". The current packet has had a couple of sites that won't accept a link anymore. So what? So have all the other packets, too...for various reasons. People sure are quick to pronounce my backlinks "dead" or "no longer working" just because of a couple of sites that turn out to be duds after the packet goes out (and I'm not talking about Ryandales).

      Again I say:

      When I create the packet, I test all the websites to make sure they work. However, there is bound to be a website or two that remove the capability to get a link. This is NORMAL. I've completely removed all "comment" type sites, so this will be a minimum, as the spammers can't do too much damage.

      Think of it this way: If a friend came to you and said he knew of a Page Rank 8 site, four page rank 7 sites, and six Page Rank 6 sites that you could get a backlink from, would you be willing to pay him $5 for it? Of course you would! That would be a steal! And that's for just 11 great sites! Think back to the old days of IM, when you had to find your OWN backlinks and they were USUALLY some low Page Rank blog (as many blogs are) you had to make a comment on. $5 for what your friend is offering to you is well worth it. Yet, people start to grumble when one or two sites in the packet don't work anymore. Some people stop using the program altogether. Even though they have more than 25 great, usable, High Page Rank sites from PR 6 all the way to PR 10 at times. Just remember the value of these links you're getting. :-)
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[897805].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jdmeg6warriror
        i just recived a threat letter from one of the social sites i place links on, im not sure if this site is from Agenlas list or pauls lists.

        Account Deactivation - Reporting You to Google


        You have just spammed our site, Urbis*com, by creating a profile for the purposes of creating backlinks to your site. This is a violation of our Terms of Use.

        We are taking the following actions:
        1. We are deactivating your Urbis account.
        2. We are reporting you to Google and other search engines, which means you will be much lower in the search rankings. Google punishes those who try to game the system.
        3. If your spamdexing activities continue, we will file a lawsuit for violation of our Terms of Use.
        This is the part of our Terms that you have violated:
        "Use the Site to engage in commercial activities and/or sales, including, but not limited to, contests, sweepstakes, barter, advertising, pyramid schemes, and any form of 'spam.'


        do any ever get this kind threat from the lists?. I will be continuing to use angelas and pauls list. i just wont be posting to this urbris
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[983422].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Joe118
          Originally Posted by jdmeg6warriror View Post

          i just recived a threat letter from one of the social sites i place links on, im not sure if this site is from Agenlas list or pauls lists.

          Account Deactivation - Reporting You to Google


          You have just spammed our site, Urbis*com, by creating a profile for the purposes of creating backlinks to your site. This is a violation of our Terms of Use.

          We are taking the following actions:
          1. We are deactivating your Urbis account.
          2. We are reporting you to Google and other search engines, which means you will be much lower in the search rankings. Google punishes those who try to game the system.
          3. If your spamdexing activities continue, we will file a lawsuit for violation of our Terms of Use.
          This is the part of our Terms that you have violated:
          "Use the Site to engage in commercial activities and/or sales, including, but not limited to, contests, sweepstakes, barter, advertising, pyramid schemes, and any form of 'spam.'


          do any ever get this kind threat from the lists?. I will be continuing to use angelas and pauls list. i just wont be posting to this urbris
          Yeah other people who use one of these backlinking products also got this warning from urbis.com. Move on, forget about urbis.com. There's plenty of other places to plant your links.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[983664].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author shmeeko69
        Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

        Yep, that's what I think, too, Faraz. I am actually quite puzzled why Askloz thinks "Angela has to find a new method / sources to get links from". The current packet has had a couple of sites that won't accept a link anymore. So what? So have all the other packets, too...for various reasons. People sure are quick to pronounce my backlinks "dead" or "no longer working" just because of a couple of sites that turn out to be duds after the packet goes out (and I'm not talking about Ryandales).

        Again I say:

        When I create the packet, I test all the websites to make sure they work. However, there is bound to be a website or two that remove the capability to get a link. This is NORMAL. I've completely removed all "comment" type sites, so this will be a minimum, as the spammers can't do too much damage.

        Think of it this way: If a friend came to you and said he knew of a Page Rank 8 site, four page rank 7 sites, and six Page Rank 6 sites that you could get a backlink from, would you be willing to pay him $5 for it? Of course you would! That would be a steal! And that's for just 11 great sites! Think back to the old days of IM, when you had to find your OWN backlinks and they were USUALLY some low Page Rank blog (as many blogs are) you had to make a comment on. $5 for what your friend is offering to you is well worth it. Yet, people start to grumble when one or two sites in the packet don't work anymore. Some people stop using the program altogether. Even though they have more than 25 great, usable, High Page Rank sites from PR 6 all the way to PR 10 at times. Just remember the value of these links you're getting. :-)
        I'm glad your still doing your packets Angela & I'm keen to get involved & will be in touch with you on monday 14th Dec.

        Cheers

        Mark
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483555].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeremy Kelsall
    Don't worry about it buddy, it's just the google dance....screw that guy, how dare he send you an email like that...what a clown.

    I'm just answering in anticipation of the answers you are going to get above.

    In reality, it is something to worry about and with the number of people that are rushing to these sites to get a link, you might be better off putting your competitors URL'S into www.backlinkwatch.com and posting to the same sites they do
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[983493].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mikeong88
      Banned
      [DELETED]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[983818].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author discrat
        Frankly Iam getting downright sick of the Spam Complainers and Spam Police altogether.
        It has shifted way . way , way to far to the other side. What I mean is that in the past and now Spam has been a problem. I dont like it as well as many others. But now everyone and their mothers is pointing the finger saying this is Spam and that is Spam and blah,blah,blah !!

        Dammit I am sick of this sh*t about Webasters complaining about Backlinks in your Private Profile which probably no one will ever see except the GOOG Bots.

        I know at my Blogs if someone leaves a respectable comment pertaining to the topic at hand and then leaves a backlink I say that is fine by me. Go for it. I was in their postion at one point of time in my IM Life. And I let it happen all the time. No problem here.

        I have had it up to my neck with the spam police !! SERIOUSLY !!!
        I tell them to get a farcking clue about what spam is. Because many of them are missing the point of what it means !
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[984090].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author AmericanWoman888
          discrat - you are so right. I get all kinds of comments on my blogs - I love them! If they are respectable. Heck yeah I let them drop a link. Some of these webmasters are worse than the KGB.

          Thanks for your input.

          I am going to continue Angela's links and watch out for the nutty webmasters.

          AW888
          Signature

          ***Test***

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[984124].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author discrat
            Originally Posted by AmericanWoman888 View Post

            discrat - you are so right. I get all kinds of comments on my blogs - I love them! If they are respectable. Heck yeah I let them drop a link. Some of these webmasters are worse than the KGB.

            Thanks for your input.

            I am going to continue Angela's links and watch out for the nutty webmasters.

            AW888


            Yeah honest to goodness a lot of these Webmasters have this "God" complex. They have this thirst for control and get high off the fact that they can muscle around others at their own Will. Kind of reminds me of the little scrawny kid in highschool who got his little behind whipped everyday in the school playground.
            I guess now its time that this little wimp gets his revenge because he is now a big time Webmaster of a big high ranking PR Website.
            Oh boy what a big man, now !!
            But to me just the same little scrawny twit !!
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[984325].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Tom Brite
              Originally Posted by discrat View Post

              Yeah honest to goodness a lot of these Webmasters have this "God" complex. They have this thirst for control and get high off the fact that they can muscle around others at their own Will. Kind of reminds me of the little scrawny kid in highschool who got his little behind whipped everyday in the school playground.
              I guess now its time that this little wimp gets his revenge because he is now a big time Webmaster of a big high ranking PR Website.
              Oh boy what a big man, now !!
              But to me just the same little scrawny twit !!
              Just thought i would say that is a funny and great comparison Discrat! ha ha

              Tom Brite
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[984342].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Joe118
    C'mon guys. This thread is over.

    * NO, its not the end of Angela's Backlinks. She has a great product that's targeted at people that want to get some backlinks w/o having to go and find them themselves.

    * NO, this is not the end of backlinking. Backlinking is alive and well. One site owner got so annoyed as to make his site give this warning. Other sites accept our links all the time.

    * YES, backlinking is alive and well. You are trading time for money here by buying Angela's product and all the other backlinking products. The main downside in my very personal opinion is that you're now part of a crowd which means that one bad spammer can spoil a specific site for everyone. If you have the time, finding your own backlink dropsites is not so hard, but it does take time, LOTS.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[983658].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Brite
      Originally Posted by Joe118 View Post

      C'mon guys. This thread is over.

      * NO, its not the end of Angela's Backlinks. She has a great product that's targeted at people that want to get some backlinks w/o having to go and find them themselves.

      * NO, this is not the end of backlinking. Backlinking is alive and well. One site owner got so annoyed as to make his site give this warning. Other sites accept our links all the time.

      * YES, backlinking is alive and well. You are trading time for money here by buying Angela's product and all the other backlinking products. The main downside in my very personal opinion is that you're now part of a crowd which means that one bad spammer can spoil a specific site for everyone. If you have the time, finding your own backlink dropsites is not so hard, but it does take time, LOTS.
      Couldn't have said this better myself to be honest!

      I personally use a mix of my own high pr backlink sources and angela's and pauls together to get maximum performance.

      Tom Brite
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[983738].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author captivereef
    if you go to urbis.com there is a scrollthat shows what the activity is, there is an account created every minute or two,. If this is normal i have no idea how they find you or notice a spike in traffic
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[984433].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author 4morereferrals
      LOL - the sky is falling ... the sky is falling ...


      A. Angelas packets are not dead

      B. Pauls Packets are not dead

      C. There ARE alternative / additions to both

      $.16 a link... Stuff is bound to happen ...
      Signature
      Rank Ascend Network - High PR Links / Guaranteed Rankings Increase
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[985050].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Powertreb
        I came across this post looking for outsouring options for Angela's backlinks. I subscribe to her link packets.

        I read through this whole thread. You people have taken an entire hour out of my life.

        My question to some of you...Are you nuts?

        Angela's links are NOT dead. Neither is backlinking. Do you realize the web as we know it would cease to exist without backlinks!!! So a site or two have admins or owners with a pet peeve. Big deal!

        Do you realize how many of these sites rely on normal everyday people. Blogging mommies for example that don't even know what SEO stands for?

        They go on there to socialize and network. They link their blogs one there to facilitate the networking. It doesn't get any simpler. Take away backlinks and noe of these "whiny" sites will be found themselves.

        "9 out of 10 people preferred the taste of Product A to Product B"

        If you're Product A,, are you going to tweak the taste to satisfy that one schmo who like your competitor? Or will you bank your resources into increasing the loyalty of the other 9 people who prefer your product?

        Most of Angela's links are social type sites where new people join all the time. They create profiles. Some join and just forget about their profiles for months.

        I keep a record of my logins for Angela's links. Occasionally I go into some randomly and participate in something. Add a friend. make a comment, whatever. It goes a long way towards building legitimacy.

        You get 30 backlinks. If all you do is post once on a high PR site and forget about it, then you're not using these packets to their full potential. You got the login. You got the account. Once in a while give it a visit. You can even post an excerpt from one of your blog posts.

        Think about how well you'd increase your chances of getting visitors by adding a couple of friends on one of these high PR sites or adding a post linking to your blog or EZA article.

        You can also use these for efficient linkwheels. They don't ALL have to be linking back to one site. You can prop up the other links. You can backlink September's links with October's packets, for example.

        You can revisit these sites once in a while and linkback to your Lens or Hub.

        There are tons of things you can do with these sites. Fact is many of them are still "below the spam radar".

        And if you actually reuse your accounts on these sites once in a while then you already have the edge over 95% of the others who are simply one-link wonders.

        As far as that whole back and forth exchange between franchiseshop, Stephen and a few others...Well I can't say I'm an SEO expert like Stephen. And I am certainly far from a millionaire like franchiseshop. If I were a millionaire I probably wouldn't be spending my evening on this forum battling to the death anyway.

        But to each their own.

        I think it's just a matter of basic common sense. People sometimes don;t realize how deep and complex search engine algorithms can be.

        It goes way beyond "too many backlinks in one day". There are so many different factors that are considered.

        A website posts a top secret government document. It gets leaked. Hits the news (web & TV)

        Next day it has half a million backlinks. It's not getting penalized.

        But if you're using dead obvious signs of automation then flags will go up.

        Google knows when you whip out some serious software and start linkspamming the universe. You might think rotating 3 or 4 titles/descriptions, etc. is clever. But not when you do it several thousand times in one night for the same URL on various Scuttle and Pligg sites. Yes flags may get raised in that instance.

        Let's say you're using Angela's and Paul's packets. That's 80 sites. You have 30 days until the new packets come out. Posting to all 80 sites in one day may not be the smartest thing to do either. Spread them out. And varying your profile names and descriptions may help also.

        franchiseshop, I also don't think you were "penalized". It's part of Google's ever-changing algorithm process.They don't give you a "time-out". You're not sent to stand in the corner for 2 hours with a dunce hat until you learn your lesson. If your site is seriously considered for spam and removal, and if it gets removed. It AIN'T coming back. Especially not on its own!

        Perhaps your site was flagged initially due to too many low quality backlinks with telltale signs of automation. There may have been a re-indexing process where your sites were run through other algorithms and filters, compared with a multitude of criteria that none of us will ever be aware of. Who knows. These are possibilities.

        But I really doubt this was a penalty (as in punishment for being a bad boy).

        If Google was intent on punishing you, you really would not see your sites back in there. Google is merciless. And if you leave a bad taste in their mouth, they will spit you out for good.

        That was not the case with your sites.

        <?WTF
        echo "END RANT";
        ?>


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1420481].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Marhelper
          Originally Posted by Powertreb View Post

          I came across this post looking for outsouring options for Angela's backlinks. I subscribe to her link packets.

          You people have taken an entire hour out of my life.

          My question to some of you...Are you nuts?

          That is classic! I agree totally. Actually, if everyone would believe that backlinking is dead then that would e fine with me and my SEO efforts.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1421646].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Black Hat Cat
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Powertreb View Post
            I came across this post looking for outsouring options for Angela's backlinks. I subscribe to her link packets.

            You people have taken an entire hour out of my life.

            My question to some of you...Are you nuts?
            No one took anything from you....you donated the time spent reading this thread willingly, and without force. No one put a gun to your head, which begs the question....are YOU nuts?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1421729].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Powertreb
              Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat View Post

              No one took anything from you....you donated the time spent reading this thread willingly, and without force. No one put a gun to your head, which begs the question....are YOU nuts?

              Geez...Maybe I should've stuck a winking smiley after that phrase.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1421865].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MarkAse
    You can always create your profiles and then come back about a week later when the moderator interest has diminished and add your links then. I've done that the past few months with Angela's links with great success, at least as far as the links sticking.
    Signature

    My current project, the Uncorked Ventures Wine Club. More coming soon, here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1422742].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jacob Martus
    It seems to me like using the backlink packets, is very much similar to spam. I mean, I'm pretty sure not many of us have an actual interest in the profile sites we are signing up for. And the repetitiveness (excuse the spelling) seems very spammy to me.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1422917].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Powertreb
      Originally Posted by Jacob Martus View Post

      It seems to me like using the backlink packets, is very much similar to spam. I mean, I'm pretty sure not many of us have an actual interest in the profile sites we are signing up for. And the repetitiveness (excuse the spelling) seems very spammy to me.
      In its truest sense I suppose it could be somewhat spammy. But let's face it. You're here to get your pages up there and get traffic. If you believe strangers across the globe will naturally link to your site by the hundreds each month, then just let that be your linking strategy.

      Using backlinking methods like these is just an integral part of SEO and propelling traffic. It is by far the lesser of any other evils.

      So if you compare creating backlinks with Angela's packets to blasting out "Great post. Are you a professional journalist?" comments onto half a million blogs, then by those measures I don't think it's spammy at all.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1424680].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Al Anshori
    still work for me.
    but for make it powerfull need some trick, like create an rss for each link and ping it.
    also dot put link after registration..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1428910].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ashley27
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1428996].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author busoppreviews
      Just started using these links. Doing an experiment to see if they actually work (hope they will as I am not getting results using other recommended methods)
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1434678].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author thmgoodw
        For the life of me, will this thread just end. Its a a $5 WSO and probably the #1 ranked WSO for the money, if you were to poll the subscribers.


        Here's a recap of the key points:

        (1) Angela's backlinks work

        (2) Angela's backlinks are cheap

        (3) If Google all of a sudden wakes up and realizes that it doesn't like a certain kind of link, the worst thing that Google could/would do is discount or not use that link. Otherwise, you could just send tons and tons of "nasty" backlinks to all of your competitors and take over the top spot in Google.

        (4) Some of the sites have been heavily spammed so not all of the sites still accept links

        (5) Angela's backlinks still work

        (6) You should use Angela's backlinks as a jumpstart so that you find your own backlink sources and make your own "power list" so you won't have to rely forever on others' mass produced backlink lists

        (7) If you are putting up "profile" backlinks, you should ping your URL pages and create RSS feeds from these URLs and submit these RSS feeds to the top RSS aggregators, to help the search engines find and crawl your backlinks. If you don't do this, don't come b*tchin that no one has found your links.


        Really, I don't know what else could possibly be discussed in this thread.

        /thread
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1434848].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John7447
    I have been using Angela back links for a year now with no problems ,sure some links get flagged as spam most dont.The cost is five bucks a month.The low life rip offs who steal the list and publish it need to be caught.They are just shoplifters.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1436233].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paj_mccarthy
    I'm probably not going to get any praise for bumping this thread but I was late to the debate:

    Couple of questions at the webmaster who says his site got penalised:

    i) The 25 sites that were linking back to your other site - were they on the same IP or in a similar IP range?

    ii) Were the 25 sites linking to eachother in any way?

    iii) Was the anchor text for all 75,000 links exactly the same?


    My train of thought is that getting a huge number of backlinks from a sites around the web probably wouldn't warrant any kind of punishment. It happens every day when sites get mainstream attention as mentioned earlier in the thread.

    However, a shed load of high PR backlinks to a newly established site each from the same IP range and that are linked to eachother in one way shape or form that contains the same anchor probably warrants some kind of red trigger.

    Just to be clear, this is pure speculation on my behalf, the above information might not be considered at all - but If I was running the anti spam team at the big G, I'd be considering a vast array of data including said elements above to determine a spam score. If the spam score breached a certain threshold then maybe it'd get flagged.

    I've no idea why it came back though after two weeks if it was penalised though. I can't really provide a counter-argument for that. If you're delisted you need to sumbit a reconsideration request for it to come back - this is what I've been led to believe on the Google webmaster forums anyway.

    Interestingly I submitted a batch of links to my site at swindon-hotels.org and it's taken an absolute spanking in the rankings- down to something like page 7 from page 3. I'm hoping for the "google dance"...Time will tell.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1480933].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author arttse
      I have used 3 of Angela's packets (90 links) to rank an article within my site.

      Although the article is listed in Google it is ranked about 400th in google. I cant seem to rank this article using Angela's packets, despite my article being SEO'ed etc and despite my home page is ranked on page 1 of google for the same keyword phrase I am trying to rank.

      Will article marketing offer a better option in this case?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1481004].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
        Originally Posted by arttse View Post

        I have used 3 of Angela's packets (90 links) to rank an article within my site.

        Although the article is listed in Google it is ranked about 400th in google. I cant seem to rank this article using Angela's packets, despite my article being SEO'ed etc and despite my home page is ranked on page 1 of google for the same keyword phrase I am trying to rank.

        Will article marketing offer a better option in this case?
        Not enough facts. There is no way we could tell your competition for this info.

        I would like to know how many (and generally what type/breakdown) backlinks are showing up for your main site, how many (and what type, etc.) are the backlinks for the other top 10 sites, and how many backlinks are showing up for article.

        Did you do anything with Angela's links after you put them up? Too many people just throw up profile backlinks and then do absolutely nothing to them, and then wonder "what the hell".

        Personally, 100% of the time I ping them (pingoat bookmarklet) and create an RSS feed of them that I send to the top RSS feed aggregators. Sometimes I will also social bookmark them.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1481524].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author arttse
          ok this is my site I am promoting.

          www.passiveincomeonline.org

          The home page is ranked on first page for 'passive income online' in google, yahoo and altavista.

          and these are the pages I am trying to rank:

          Passive Income Online | Learn Methods To Earn Passive Income Online

          trying to get indexed for keyword phrase 'passive income online'

          Passive Income Opportunities | How To Create Passive Income Opportunities

          trying to get indexed for keyword phrase 'passive income opportunities'

          ps, No pingging, rss feeds or social bookmarking for Angela's sites.

          I didnt think that this was necessary, given the type of sites

          pps. Thanks for replying and assisting with my issue.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1481794].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
            Hi there-

            First,

            You have to keep in mind that most profile type links are not on heavily crawled webpages. Its not like a thread here in warriorforum where google will pick it up within a few minutes. In most circumstances, you really should ping them and submit an RSS feed for them to help google find the links.

            Here is my analysis:

            I looked at the results through Market Samurai.

            Your doimain came in at #10 in google (note that in my rank tracker it showed up as #2 in Yahoo).

            Of the top 10 sites, you have:

            #1 -- 58 page backlinks, but 6560 domain backlinks
            #2 -- 7000+ page backlinks, 8000+ domain backlinks, and "passive income" is in the root domain name
            #3 -- 4000+ page backlinks, 8000+ domain backlinks
            #4 -- ehow page (which will often rank very high with zero backlinks)
            #5 -- 800+ page backlinks, 900+ domain backlinks, and "passive income" is in the root domain name
            #6 -- 17 page backlinks, and 26000+ domain backlinks
            #7 == domain name is "onlinepassiveincome", and has 500+ page backlinks and 600+ domain backlinks
            #8 = archive page with zero page backlinks, but domain has 13000+ domain backlinks
            #9 -- domain only has 5 backlinks, but it is the exact matching keyword domain of passiveincomeonline.net
            #10 -- Your site

            This tells me that it is a very tough keyword. You have have an exact match keyword domain, you can overcome a lot of that in google's eyes, as your site and passiveincomeonline.net demonstrates.

            Your first article that you want ranked is only showing 6 backlinks. As I noted above, you need to help google find your links. In addition, note that based upon the above competition, I would think you would need *at least* 100+ backlinks showing up for this page to rank 1st page of google. The competition is fierce.

            As for the other keyword that you want to rank for "passive income opportunities", likewise, I looked at the competition and I think you would need at least say 50+ backlinks showing up to rank for these keywords.



            Originally Posted by arttse View Post

            ok this is my site I am promoting.

            www.passiveincomeonline.org

            The home page is ranked on first page for 'passive income online' in google, yahoo and altavista.

            and these are the pages I am trying to rank:

            Passive Income Online | Learn Methods To Earn Passive Income Online

            trying to get indexed for keyword phrase 'passive income online'

            Passive Income Opportunities | How To Create Passive Income Opportunities

            trying to get indexed for keyword phrase 'passive income opportunities'

            ps, No pingging, rss feeds or social bookmarking for Angela's sites.

            I didnt think that this was necessary, given the type of sites

            pps. Thanks for replying and assisting with my issue.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483307].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author arttse
              Thanks for your detailed analysis Tom. It goes to show how important it is to have your keywords in the root domain name. I will follow your recommendations ie pingging, rss, bookmarking etc and see if I an improve my ranking for the inner pages.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485414].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Since I am one of the UFAQ moderators and co-admin, let me clarify a few major points.

    1. Angela herself posted a link in our forum which was removed. She indicated that she read the TOS but violated it anyway. A courtesy email requesting permission would have been ethically nice even though the request would have been denied. We did, however, get an email from an "Angela user" asking permission which was granted and the FREE link was posted for 30 days.
    2. The UFAQ is a support FORUM, not a blog or chat site. Entering a post in a support venue with a nonsense type answer just for the purpose of adding links is counterproductive as well as possibly leading the user in the wrong direction, etc.
    3. The forum is set to NO-FOLLOW - if you don't know what that means, ask
    4. All forum pages are PR-0

    One poster here thinks that posting a link to a competitor will get the competitor banned. Not so, the link is removed and the poster is the one that gets banned. :-D

    Google's PR is a dead issue and meaningless now as the ranking algo has been modified quite a bit - backlinking is the way to go now.

    One other clarification - The admin/owner of the UFAQ has his main domain posted in his signature but the site is NOT a commercial site, no money is made from that site. We DO own over 30 commercial domains and NONE are linked on the UFAQ but we do have paid advertising, display and links, on the UFAQ.

    Any other questions, etc. I'll be most happy to address.

    BTW: Our TOS no longer mentions Angela, Clickbank or any other SEO site/application/service or otherwise. It is not our intention to single out any particular service. YMMV

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483001].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Very nice post. I think that is a very very fair position to have.

      Quick question though. Are we talking about an actual forum post (with signature link?), or backlink in the profile? It was tough to tell from your comment below.



      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Since I am one of the UFAQ moderators and co-admin, let me clarify a few major points.

      1. Angela herself posted a link in our forum which was removed. She indicated that she read the TOS but violated it anyway. A courtesy email requesting permission would have been ethically nice even though the request would have been denied. We did, however, get an email from an "Angela user" asking permission which was granted and the FREE link was posted for 30 days.
      2. The UFAQ is a support FORUM, not a blog or chat site. Entering a post in a support venue with a nonsense type answer just for the purpose of adding links is counterproductive as well as possibly leading the user in the wrong direction, etc.
      3. The forum is set to NO-FOLLOW - if you don't know what that means, ask
      4. All forum pages are PR-0

      One poster here thinks that posting a link to a competitor will get the competitor banned. Not so, the link is removed and the poster is the one that gets banned. :-D

      Google's PR is a dead issue and meaningless now as the ranking alogrithm has been modified quite a bit - backlinking is the way to go now.

      One other clarification - The admin/owner of the UFAQ has his main domain posted in his signature but the site is NOT a commercial site, no money is made from that site. We DO own over 30 commercial domains and NONE are linked on the UFAQ but we do have paid advertising, display and links, on the UFAQ.

      Any other questions, etc. I'll be most happy to address.

      BTW: Our TOS no longer mentions Angela, Clickbank or any other SEO site/application/service or otherwise. It is not our intention to single out any particular service. YMMV

      /ud
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483319].message }}
    • Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Since I am one of the UFAQ moderators and co-admin, let me clarify a few major points.

      /ud
      Here is my post on the UFAQ forum. This was a post
      about a particular program that one of the users
      was asking about. I have a very good friend who is "techie"
      and is quite familiar with the program.

      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1486260].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
        Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

        Here is my post on the UFAQ forum. This was a post
        about a particular program that one of the users
        was asking about. I have a very good friend who is "techie"
        and is quite familiar with the program.

        I'm sorry but your forum comment screams spam. It looks like an obvious attempt to get your links into a forum by leaving a vanilla response that add nothing to the conversation or topic.

        I've seen plenty of other comments you've made on forums that are very similar. Either you are the most eclectic person on the planet or you are (or were) spamming forums.

        I know everyone selling links has a thousand ways to spin what they are doing as not being spam and could even be helpful for those sites they are spamming.

        It's all BS... it's spam.

        You're leaving links for your own personal gain without a care in the world for the sites where you are leaving links.

        At least Terry Kyle in his WSO has the integrity or balls to come out and admit that it is what is is.... spamming other sites for backlinks.
        Signature

        I'm all about that bass.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1486413].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          I know everyone selling links has a thousand ways to spin what they are doing as not being spam and could even be helpful for those sites they are spamming........You're leaving links for your own personal gain without a care in the world for the sites where you are leaving links.
          This is pointless. Without a clue of what "everyone selling links" actually does you make a universal blanket omniscient claim of what people who you don't know do or care about. Sorry but its just a "I am holier than thou" back scratch and I keep wondering with all the things people could be holier than thou about, with all the great issues, dying kids, starving mothers and injustices of the world who actually saves their energy for backlinks? I mean backlinks that you can't possible leave on a site unless the programmer of the site allowed for it? I can count MANY sites that do not consider it spam to leave a link, Thats a fact I KNOW so your claims to me are empty.

          Vent on.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1486495].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jaiganeshv.com
    I'm getting forbidden error in ufaq.org
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483356].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ud
      Originally Posted by jaiganeshv.com View Post

      I'm getting forbidden error in ufaq.org
      It was down for maintenance at 0900, try again.

      /ud
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483500].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pixelrage
    I'm starting to get really annoyed at this program, and it's not because of the time or the idea of it - but the fact that if you arent there the day that email comes in from Angela, a good half of the links within it are worthless as the webmasters obviously noticed a huge spike in registrations and turned them off entirely.

    I was going through the packet just a few days after it came in, and half of them disabled registration entirely.

    There must be a lot of people abusing the hell out of this system.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483728].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ud
      There must be a lot of people abusing the hell out of this system
      There is, and the basic reason is that they are trying to get something for nothing and not adding any valuable content to the posts/threads, etc. There are many forums, blogs, etc. that shy away from posting links but will allow posting of links if permission is sought beforehand. It's the underhanded that annoys most webmasters.

      We're not "bad people" at all, just in tune with our users needing support without being inundated with useless replies for the sake of adding a link or two, etc.

      Look at it this way. You post to a support forum regarding problems with your Firefox browser and then you get 3 or 4 "me too" replies or even an answer that has absolutely nothing to do with your issue and each replie is accompanied by "Eat At Joe's" links for instance. :-(

      /ud
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483851].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by ud View Post

        Look at it this way. You post to a support forum regarding problems with your Firefox browser and then you get 3 or 4 "me too" replies or even an answer that has absolutely nothing to do with your issue and each replie is accompanied by "Eat At Joe's" links for instance. :-(
        /ud
        Yes that is nonsense. so these were signature backlinks left?

        I don't know that your charge of underhand fits though (not saying yoru otehr charges are off base though). I dont know your site and am alot more selective with backlinks but it may not be "underhanded" at all. It seems the links were right there in the open and your forum was set up to allow signature links for anyone when you could have locked that down to a certain amount of posts etc. Still the me too and the link is downright annoying and spam. if you can take the time to write a response why not contribute soemthing meaningful.

        Obviously don't know what your TOS said but unfortunately people routinely don't read long legalese. I wouldn't be surprised if she in fact never read it.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484051].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author pixelrage
          Don't the directions in Angela's Backlinks say that you don't even need to make a post? I can't understand why anyone would be doing that, it's the best way to get banned from any forum.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484140].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
            Originally Posted by pixelrage View Post

            Don't the directions in Angela's Backlinks say that you don't even need to make a post? I can't understand why anyone would be doing that, it's the best way to get banned from any forum.
            You are correct. Note that many of the sites in Angela's earlier packets involved making posts, but that was really abused by many people so now all of the links do not involve posting.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484510].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author belgirl
        I know I have said this on the forum before, but if webmasters don't want people posting links in their profile or in their forum signature then disable the option from the beginning. It amazes me that webmasters set up these forums with the ability to post profile links, signature links, yadda yadda yadda and then go on a rampage when people abuse the system.

        It's like the owner with a dog who loves trash. The owner is gone for the day, leaves the trash out and accessible and then scolds the dog for getting into the trash and throwing it all around the house. You know the dog is going to get into the trash, so don't leave it out to begin with.



        Originally Posted by ud View Post

        There is, and the basic reason is that they are trying to get something for nothing and not adding any valuable content to the posts/threads, etc. There are many forums, blogs, etc. that shy away from posting links but will allow posting of links if permission is sought beforehand. It's the underhanded that annoys most webmasters.

        We're not "bad people" at all, just in tune with our users needing support without being inundated with useless replies for the sake of adding a link or two, etc.

        Look at it this way. You post to a support forum regarding problems with your Firefox browser and then you get 3 or 4 "me too" replies or even an answer that has absolutely nothing to do with your issue and each replie is accompanied by "Eat At Joe's" links for instance. :-(

        /ud
        Signature
        Do you need a website? Click here for quality website design at affordable prices | Web Designer Since 2002
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484786].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
          Originally Posted by belgirl View Post

          You know the dog is going to get into the trash, so don't leave it out to begin with.

          Amen sister
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484799].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author edgray
    I'm a recent subscriber to this system, I wanted to give it a go and see what all the fuss is about. I have noticed that within Angela's PDFs she shows a surprising lack of SEO knowledge with regards to things like PageRank.

    The whole system is really what any good SEOer would be doing anyway. And the links are pretty much just basic links, albeit a couple of steps up from a forum post.

    Still, it's cheap and saves a little searching around.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1483945].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author 2d0k
      Originally Posted by edgray View Post

      I have noticed that within Angela's PDFs she shows a surprising lack of SEO knowledge with regards to things like PageRank.
      Could you please tell us why and give evidence to support your claim..
      Signature

      Hasta La Victoria Siempre!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484198].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author edgray
        Originally Posted by 2d0k View Post

        Could you please tell us why and give evidence to support your claim..
        There's a section in the latest packets about biggest questions:
        I have already addressed the question about backlinks on an “inner page” of a High Page Rank domain
        PageRank isn't assigned to domains - page rank is assigned to pages. Putting a link on a site that has an index page with a PR of 7, for example, does not mean you'll get any PR passed over whatsoever. What would be a better description is Domain Authority.

        Angela claims you don't need to post or comment on the sites she finds, but if you really want the links you put up there to have any chance of passing page rank, it's a good idea to post - the more links you generate to your profile, the more link juice can be passed through to your sites.

        Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin View Post

        I don't think the general target audience of Angela's links are folks with a high level of SEO knowledge and those that can find links for themselves. It definitely helps those starting out, which I think is the main purpose of it.
        Oh for sure. I don't mean to belittle Angela's system at all - as you say, for newbies it's a great tool and even for seasoned vets, it saves a lot of work finding some great places for links. I do think it's totally worth the money, for beginners and experts alike. Just don't count on them too much.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1486596].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by edgray View Post

      I'm a recent subscriber to this system, I wanted to give it a go and see what all the fuss is about. I have noticed that within Angela's PDFs she shows a surprising lack of SEO knowledge with regards to things like PageRank.

      The whole system is really what any good SEOer would be doing anyway. And the links are pretty much just basic links, albeit a couple of steps up from a forum post.

      Still, it's cheap and saves a little searching around.

      I don't think the general target audience of Angela's links are folks with a high level of SEO knowledge and those that can find links for themselves. It definitely helps those starting out, which I think is the main purpose of it.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484516].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Axel.jr
    I think angela not dead yet, i am still use this technique to increase my backlink and there are still many people sell this service
    Signature

    Want to have an autopilot website?, Visit www.tomatube.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484254].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Yes that is nonsense. so these were signature backlinks left?
    Some yes, but along with a non-productive answer to a request for help, etc.

    I don't know that your charge of underhand fits though
    Underhanded simply means posting a link in spite of the TOS as well as using the forum posts to include a link, which does the user needing help no good.

    I wouldn't be surprised if she in fact never read it.
    The part of the TOS regarding the posting of links is at the very top and the user has to scroll to the bottom to "agree/disagree" in order to move on. But you are most correct, most people don't read the terms.

    ... say that you don't even need to make a post?
    The only way I know of to post a link in a forum is to make a post, otherwise where/how is that going to be accomplished? ;-)

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484439].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by ud View Post



      The only way I know of to post a link in a forum is to make a post, otherwise where/how is that going to be accomplished? ;-)

      /ud
      You can often put up a link on the person's profile page of the forum, whether that is just in a URL field, in the bio section, in the signature section, etc. Sometimes these are visible to users not logged in. Hence you get a link in a forum without a post.

      In fact, 100% of Angela's links (in her backlinks packet) involve sites where no posting is required.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484503].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    I think this is of far more importance to any backlink package that is distributed by PDF or text for mass use. Check out the number 2 ( of five) negative ranking factor


    Search Engine Ranking Factors | SEOmoz

    google is watching. Time for everyone - not just Angela - to protect their lists.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484637].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      I think this is of far more importance to any backlink package that is distributed by PDF or text for mass use. Check out the number 2 ( of five) negative ranking factor


      Search Engine Ranking Factors | SEOmoz

      google is watching. Time for everyone - not just Angela - to protect their lists.
      Note that I whenever I have read something on this specific point, this pretty much always relates to the places that advertise something like "get your site on the front page of a PR5 site for $99/month". To be honest, I just don't see how this could be applied to the situation at hand in a negative ranking factor sort of way.

      What i find more interesting is #3, which is mentioned sometimes on this forum although i'm not sure if everyone gets it. While you can't control your incoming links, you really need to be sure that your outgoing links go to good properties.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484750].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin View Post

        Note that I whenever I have read something on this specific point, this pretty much always relates to the places that advertise something like "get your site on the front page of a PR5 site for $99/month". To be honest, I just don't see how this could be applied to the situation at hand in a negative ranking factor sort of way.
        Pretty easy and obvious for me to see. If Google is monitoring link sellers then why would they not take into account link lists that are sold? In fact its easier. You get your hands on a popular list and you enter in links that you devalue. Its even more important now to keep the links out of general distribution.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484920].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Pretty easy and obvious for me to see. If Google is monitoring link sellers then why would they not take into account link lists that are sold? In fact its easier. You get your hands on a popular list and you enter in links that you devalue. Its even more important now to keep the links out of general distribution.
          I don't deny your point Mike. I just disagree that this would fall into the category or item that you described.

          Maybe I didn't make myself clear. When I looked at the list of "negative" considerations/factors, these appeared to be items that would negatively affect a site.

          This included such things like having outgoing links on sites that you control to bad neighborhoods. This makes perfect sense as you control it.

          At the most Google could devalue or discount the importance of Angela's links. This is very distinct from attaching a negative value to having such a link. So, in my eyes, this potential issue with these distributed backlink packets would not fall into that negative consideration bucket.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485366].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin View Post

            I don't deny your point Mike. I just disagree that this would fall into the category or item that you described.
            Well you are free to think of it any way you wish. I'll never argue with your right to do that but I just expressed what I consider to be common sense and people can then make up their own mind. Under negative affects it states.

            "Link Acquisition from Known Link Brokers/Sellers"

            So its pretty obvious to me then that Google is watching and taking note of links from link brokers and sellers and that it would b better to keep ANY backlink list under lock and key so to speak (As much as is possible).

            I suppose you could try and split a hair and say that lists with links is not selling backlinks and I might even agree with you (to a degree) but I seriously doubt Google is going to make that distinction. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me that they would split that hair but others can decide.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485448].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author WareTime
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post


              "Link Acquisition from Known Link Brokers/Sellers"

              So its pretty obvious to me then that Google is watching and taking note of links from link brokers and sellers and that it would b better to keep ANY backlink list under lock and key so to speak (As much as is possible).
              One could imagine that google buys the packets and other things sold here and elsewhere. You can draw your own conclusions as to what that may mean.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1738895].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by WareTime View Post

                One could imagine that google buys the packets and other things sold here and elsewhere. You can draw your own conclusions as to what that may mean.
                Can't really draw a conclusion based on an imagination. However thats really not the case since if they did it would be for the purpose of discounting the links from those sites. Since they still do work (proved it to myself recently with a new domain) they either don't bother doing that or they don't buy everything.

                Links spam conveyed in a forum profile. You join a forum soley under the guise of being a normal participant and put your links to ALL NATURAL ACNE CURE in your signature hoping to get your links crawled by search engines.
                I don't know what is in Angela's links these days but in fairness they use to be more than forums.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1739147].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Hence you get a link in a forum without a post.
    Interesting, from the point of view that every search engine that visits our support sites bypass profiles. With that in mind, and IMHO, it's underhanded to register on a site, create a profile for link purposes only and then leave without adding anything useful, unless the user is actually going to be a contributing member. Can't do that on all our forums where there is paid advertising on-site. There are a lot of "what-ifs" involved in registering just to create a profile - what IF the site only allows so many registrants - creating a "just profile" takes up a slot.

    IMHO only, it's a waste of time and $$ to pay somebody for a link package. Why not just peruse the net looking for fora, blogs, etc. and then ask for permission to post a link, there are many many places to do just that. Google is your friend - :-)

    Courtesy can be a wonderful thing. Like I mentioned a reply or two ago, I had a link-package user actually asked to post a link to his real-estate site and I did, for 30 days and backlinks were passed like crazy.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484813].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Interesting, from the point of view that every search engine that visits our support sites bypass profiles.

      /ud
      That's why a lot of us use firefox addons which instantly tells us if a page is noindex or links are nofollow. It works wonders.

      Are the profile pages actually noindex in the robots.txt file, or are you just saying that the search engine spiders just don't crawl that far? Because if its the latter, there are lots of ways of getting these pages crawled.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484841].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      and IMHO, it's underhanded to register on a site, create a profile for link purposes only and then leave without adding anything useful, unless the user is actually going to be a contributing member.
      Well I have been with you when you talk about your site but you really can't talk for all others generally and certainly not in a blanket morality way. I come across MANY sites that have no problem with links being left. Many are business related and want the links for business networking for their members. Some even go to the extraordinary lengths of creating anchor text fields and URL fields so that you can link back with the text you want.

      Why not just peruse the net looking for fora, blogs, etc. and then ask for permission to post a link, there are many many places to do just that. Google is your friend - :-)
      Well for one its a tremendous time waster and two it assumes that all sites have a problem with placing links again. Its really not a matter of courtesy if you design a site to take the links. You've already extended the invitation. I think the only legitimate grounds you have is that your TOS was against it and allegedly clear at that. Sorry but thats not the case on all sites. Some have no TOS at all against it and encourage it. Furthermore many people do add value after and before placing the link and thats a whole lot faster and less resource consuming than link requesting etc.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484975].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author belgirl
        Amen brother.

        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        Well I have been with you when you talk about your site but you really can't talk for all others generally and certainly not in a blanket morality way. I come across MANY sites that have no problem with links being left. Many are business related and want the links for business networking for their members. Some even go to the extraordinary lengths of creating anchor text fields and URL fields so that you can link back with the text you want.



        Well for one its a tremendous time waster and two it assumes that all sites have a problem with placing links again. Its really not a matter of courtesy if you design a site to take the links. You've already extended the invitation. I think the only legitimate grounds you have is that your TOS was against it and allegedly clear at that. Sorry but thats not the case on all sites. Some have no TOS at all against it and encourage it. Furthermore many people do add value after and before placing the link and thats a whole lot faster and less resource consuming than link requesting etc.
        Signature
        Do you need a website? Click here for quality website design at affordable prices | Web Designer Since 2002
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485013].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    It amazes me that webmasters set up these forums with the ability to post profile links, signature links, yadda yadda yadda and then go on a rampage when people abuse the system.
    Agree 100%, that's why we have it disabled. What I find quite amusing tho is people that try to hide links by making the link the same color as the background. Unfortunately we cannot disable html/links because we have to reference other support sites and so on.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484823].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Tom .. I am a retired Netscape programmer and my expertise was regarding the mail/news components (messenger), also a contributing programmer for PHPBB. There are many ways to get around any such addon and/or crawler demon. But we don't have to employ any such things as we don't allow free links in the first place and the feature is disabled for sigs, profiles, etc. => Dog/Trash theory. :-)

    BTW: I disabled the no-follow for links in the support forum because we need to have some FAQ links crawled as well as other support links, etc. "no-follow" was working TOO good!

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1484881].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Mike .. I think you missed my point regarding creating a profile JUST for the purpose of including an ad-link. If a site allows that then so be it. Doesn't mean that I encourage it, I don't. Guess I'm from the "old school" where if you want to become part of a community then by all means do so - contribute. Be a "giver", not a "taker". That's what I meant, not against posting links on sites that do encourage it by design.

    And you're right about creating a site to take links, I think I already covered that thought somewhat.

    What is your thought(s) about users that see that there are obviously PAID ads/links on a site, then register and attempt to post a FREE link, try to hide them and so on? There were many of Angela's package customers that did just that on our support site. Those are the "people" I'm mainly speaking of. Yes, I do realize that there some very good people out there trying to make a go of their sites but hey, let's do it right.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485164].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      What is your thought(s) about users that see that there are obviously PAID ads/links on a site, then register and attempt to post a FREE link, try to hide them and so on? There were many of Angela's package customers that did just that on our support site. Those are the "people" I'm mainly speaking of. Yes, I do realize that there some very good people out there trying to make a go of their sites but hey, let's do it right.
      To me it sounded like they spammed you plain and simple. Its one thing to leave a link in a profile section (thats outside of your forum itself but in a user section). At most that cost you a few bits of data and are to a lot of sites inconsequential. Its an entirely different thing to storm onto a forum where people are participating and disrupt it. That IS shady and underhanded.

      You need to understand though that Angela was not unsympathetic to your situation. She eventually stopped a lot of that kind of linking because she couldn't control all the people using her links. If it were me I would have kicked them off my list but unfortunately she can't. Its just too many people to keep track of.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485272].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Mike .. Of course I agree but somewhat .. You can't make too many rules, eg., you can add a link in your profile but not in a signature or in the posted text and so on, users get too overwhelmed. What we did was to make it a site-wide issue, no free links anywhere PERIOD.

    What Angela did was to post an ad-link in a reply that was one of those nonsense replies that I mentioned. We let it run for a while to see what would happen. Sure enough, ad links started popping up in replies that were the same type of nonsense reply. Soooo, what were we to determine about this, coincidence? - I think not. That's when I found out that our link was included in her package from one the customers. Doesn't take rocket science does it. Why didn't we get a courtesy email inquiring about policy?

    We still get the very occasional spam-linker and I mean very occasional, maybe one every two weeks or so and are quickly dispatched.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485417].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Mike .. Of course I agree but somewhat .. You can't make too many rules, eg., you can add a link in your profile but not in a signature or in the posted text and so on, users get too overwhelmed.
      I don't know what forum software you are using but thats pretty easy to setup in vbulletin.

      What Angela did was to post an ad-link in a reply that was one of those nonsense replies that I mentioned. We let it run for a while to see what would happen. Sure enough, ad links started popping up in replies that were the same type of nonsense reply. Soooo, what were we to determine about this, coincidence? - I think not.
      Well like I said that would be spam so I have no contention with that but since I am not a witness to the alleged crime I won't conclude one way or the other.

      That's when I found out that our link was included in her package from one the customers. Doesn't take rocket science does it. Why didn't we get a courtesy email inquiring about policy?
      Really a separate issue. if she came on your site made a good response and dropped her links she doesn't need your permission. YOupolicy would be implicit in how you set the site up and the TOS. I mean I know that might rile you and a few others but thats how you set it up. You occupy space connected to a public internet and you chose to give people access to those functions (I'm again assuming signature links). If its against your TOS then that is your point but thats it. Without the TOS she doesn't need to ask permission. I'm a programmer. I can't complain that people use the functions I built in to my software. I can only attach rules to its use. In the absence of those rules I have no leg to stand on.

      anyway that was a while back and this thread is long enough as it is. Wish you the best.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1485506].message }}
    • Originally Posted by ud View Post

      What Angela did was to post an ad-link in a reply that was one of those nonsense replies that I mentioned. We let it run for a while to see what would happen. Sure enough, ad links started popping up in replies that were the same type of nonsense reply. Soooo, what were we to determine about this, coincidence? - I think not. That's when I found out that our link was included in her package from one the customers. Doesn't take rocket science does it. Why didn't we get a courtesy email inquiring about policy?
      I've actually NEVER done that. If you happen to be talking about the Ufaq site, I still have a screenshot of my post on that site. That's the very reason I STOPPED putting "comment style" sites in the packets; because some folks were doing this very thing. If *I* were also doing it, why would I leave those types of sites OUT of my packets? Most of the ones I have are VERY High Page Rank; we're talking PR 7, 8 and 9. Certainly those High PR sites in the packets would sell more subscriptions for me, so if I agreed with doing that sort of thing, what good would it do ME to leave them out of the packets now????

      It's okay not to like the links. It's NOT okay to tell untruths about someone else.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1486207].message }}
  • Well, what one person calls "spam" another person calls "adding value". However, I WAS answering another poster's query with a REAL offer to help him (I really and truly intended to ask my friend to help this poster out), so my post was anything but a "nonsense reply", as it was called.

    What Angela did was to post an ad-link in a reply that was one of those nonsense replies that I mentioned.
    It's all in how you look at it whether it's "spam" or not, but offering to help someone is anything but a "nonsense reply". That's what I said I had NOT done. I didn't even mention "spam" anywhere at all in my post.

    Like most forum owners, just because a link was included in the post, the entire post was trashed as having zero value. I should also mention that at the time those links were left, there was absolutely NOTHING for sale on my "Angela" page, and the "Backlinks" link went to my article, which is quite informative and isn't a direct sales page, so that can't really be called an "ad-link", can it? So it could even be argued that the links themselves weren't "spam", AND I wasn't trying to rank for "Angela" at the time I made that post. (You can tell because the anchor text was "Angela from Aberdeen".) I simply linked to my "Angela" page because it is an introduction of sorts and that's what I've always done on forums so people know a little bit more about me.
    Signature
    -----------------------------------------


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1486456].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Here is my post on the UFAQ forum.
    So what you're telling me is that you made a post and included two links after you indicated that you agreed to our TOS .. marvelous revelation. If we thought your reply was useful, we would have simply removed the links and let the reply stand.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487011].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    I should also mention that at the time those links were left, there was absolutely NOTHING for sale on my "Angela" page, and the "Backlinks" link went to my article, which is quite informative and isn't a direct sales page, so that can't really be called an "ad-link", can it?
    So, you would have us believe that those two links you posted had absolutely nothing to do with your commercial venture? C'mon gal, we've been around the block longer than you've been on the planet! You posted in a support forum, what do those links have to do with the original poster's question? You say that you hadn't started your package sales yet but why, a few months later, we start getting dozens of the same exact type of postings from users that purchased your packages? And why did you include our site in your package? Could it be that you made a test run first yourself? Now, if you want to go a bit further with this, you're making money selling packages that included our site. Do we get a commission? How 'bout we charge you $1.00 for every $5.00 pack that included our site? :-)

    You have the right to make money just like everyone else and I'm not attempting to deny you that right but be up front and ethical with sites you include in your packs. We emailed you when this first started to please take our site off the list. Never got a reply.

    What else is very interesting is that later on we saw in our logs that some users were searching for "Angela", "Angela from Aberdeen" and "Angela Edwards" ... How do you address that? How did they know to search for those? Even had a user - an attorney from California - register just to post a rebuttal to our Spam Linker Warning post. Wonder why? Haven't heard from him since.


    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487051].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      So, you would have us believe that those two links you posted had absolutely nothing to do with your commercial venture? C'mon gal, we've been around the block longer than you've been on the planet!
      If you have been around the block as long as you say then you should know that if you refer to a grown man as a boy in the context of an argument it can be taken derogatively. Its no different if you should refer to woman as a "Gal".

      Don't know about your forum but on this board we generally bend backwards to make sure our ladies are referred to with respect despite whatever disagreements we might have, In fact it might be better to leave gender references out of it all together. There was a tone of condescension in that sentence in more than one way.

      At this point its all rehash and you've made your point and even in the past referenced her by name for an event that happened months ago. Move on people. Participate on some sites where real disasters are discussed and people's lives are at stake and leave the extreme indignation for things that matter.

      I'm officially out. This is now entirely a vent thread.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487539].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    I mean backlinks that you can't possible leave on a site unless the programmer of the site allowed for it?
    Really?? ad-links (free ones) are not allowed as per our TOS but posters try their best to leave a few links in replies anyway - nonsense replies that is for the purpose of personal and/or commercial GAIN! I have absolutely NO problem with sites that allow it. Just don't come to our site, agree to the TOS and then flagrantly violate it. If it's not read then that's not our problem. And don't come to our site posting links where the intention is to use our free support venue to make money for your own self. Paying for ads is part of your ROI and CODB.

    Angela:

    Another intersting thing you mentioned is that you made a screen-copy of your "successful" post. Now, if it were me that was putting together a package such as yours I would include a screenshot showing that I made a post and how to do it to include links ... go figure, 'eh?

    PS: Here is a link that lists 10 SEO Blogs Accepting Guest Posts : PromoteYourself

    searchenginejournal.com/seo-blogs-guest-posts/15194

    No need to pay anyone, just donate whatever you can to your favorite charity. Some of you may already know this but for those that don't, good luck!


    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487086].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Really?? ad-links (free ones) are not allowed as per our TOS but posters try their best to leave a few links in replies anyway - nonsense replies that is for the purpose of personal and/or commercial GAIN! I have absolutely NO problem with sites that allow it. Just don't come to our site, agree to the TOS and then flagrantly violate it. If it's not read then that's not our problem. And don't come to our site posting links where the intention is to use our free support venue to make money for your own self. Paying for ads is part of your ROI and CODB.
      You are arguing with the wind addressing that to my point. I have already said several times your TOS is your point. You asked me a general question. Direct your anger elsewhere. I have had and will never have any interest in posting on your site. I have a number of standards that your site would not meet. Frankly I don't know why Angela was even interested in it.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487488].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Mike .. The only "standard" on our site is support for users needing help, that's it no more no less, it's not a chat/blog site - posters come looking for help and that is exactly what they get and expect. The UFAQ has been up for 14+ years now without complaint. Not angry at all, was just puzzled, but no longer, I have my answers. No sense in turning this into a flame battle. Quite obvious what Angela's interest was.

    Good luck with your SEO ventures.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487550].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      I do have one last point to make to be fair to you. I am not sure whether the links were left in the signature or in the body of the post. If it was in the signature then I don't see the mortal crime. At most you could say she didn't read the the TOS and I take her at her word that the post was not garbage.

      However if the links were in the body of the post then it was not programmed to do that so it would be spam regardless. just so you understnad there are some standards (in addition to observing TOS). Either way this happened months ago.

      You have a nice day and if you ever need some backlinks - call me

      Just pulling your leg my man. We need to laugh every now and again
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487576].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    If you have been around the block as long as you say then you should know that if you refer to a grown man as a boy in the context of an argument it can be taken derogatively. Its no different if you should refer to woman as a "Gal".
    I'm 74 years old and where I come from and was brought up, "Gal" is a term of endearment, not derogatory at all and wasn't meant that way whatsoever.

    I was also taught to be respectful and apologetic .. So .. Angela, IF you took "Gal" to mean something derogatory then I sincerely apologize.

    We can argue, have heated discussions and so on but when it turns ugly it's time to go. And for you, Mike, have a nice day. If you have a problem and need support, you're most welcomed on our site.


    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487565].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Mike .. The links were in the body of her post, did you notice her screen-shot of her post? Funny thing is that her post was allowed to remain more than SIX months and no followup was ever posted that MAY have helped the OP.

    Already have 25,000+ backlinks across several search engines, not that we need any, but thanks anyways.

    Thanks for the "leg pulling", can always use a leg-up on any issue. :-D

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487611].message }}
    • Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Mike .. The links were in the body of her post, did you notice her screen-shot of her post? Funny thing is that her post was allowed to remain more than SIX months and no followup was ever posted that MAY have helped the OP.
      Again, it's okay to debate and it's perfectly okay to remove links from your site if you don't like them. However, the only reason why I entered this "debate" is because this poster continuously "debates" with untruths about me. Yes, I kept a screenshot of my post and when I went back to see if the OP had answered, I couldn't get into the forum. You said my post was allowed for MORE THAN SIX MONTHS. That's funny. My post was made of February 17, 2009:




      Six months from that date would have been August 17, 2009

      However, on June 4 of 2009, UFAQ already had THIS up on their site:



      Angela From Aberdeen - The Netscape Unofficial FAQ

      It's perfectly fine that your forum doesn't like links. I no longer put these types of links in the packets at all, as they are abused by some folks. It's fine that you removed the links and it's even fine that you don't want me to come back to your forum. However, what's NOT fine is telling untruths.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1487932].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Ok, so I should have said "several" or "many" months or "several weeks", etc. instead, pick one that suits you best. OR just tell us that you had no intention of returning. Doesn't matter really since months went by without a return reply. Not an untruth, just an error. Case closed.

    Interesting that you take so many screen shots. Conclusions can be drawn from that as to the reason, surely you don't think we're a pretty site. We've had second thoughts about stuff we've posted related to spam-linkers and we've removed those as this is NOT what we're all about. We're about providing good support to our users, not about debating spam links and so on.

    If there is nothing else you need to defend then we can close this issue?

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488098].message }}
    • Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Ok, so I should have said "several" or "many" months or "several weeks", etc. instead, pick one that suits you best. OR just tell us that you had no intention of returning. Doesn't matter really since months went by without a return reply. Not an untruth, just an error. Case closed.

      /ud
      Like I said, I tried to return and could not get back in. This wasn't six months later, either. I don't remember exactly how long it was, but it was within a few weeks.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488106].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
    Give it up. We get that everyone wants to make money, and/or protect their link packet business, or their precious forum, but come on.

    Putting a link on a site both is and isn't spam. It's both, so wrap your heads around that, stick it in your pipe and smoke it, pray about it, or do whatever you need to in order to sleep at night. "Contribution" is not black and white, so who's to say a comment with a link isn't contributing to some random visitor's experience? Even a list of links might be a benefit if someone is looking for something specific in that list. Regardless, it's only a few needless bits of information that costs fractions of a penny for webmasters.

    And I'm sorry, but if you don't like the smoke, get out of the kitchen. You are on a little thing called the Internet, so tough luck if you get some of the things it comes with. Shut your forum down and go cry in your beer if that makes you feel better about it. Other people with realistic expectations will step up. They'll lock down whatever they don't want to be used and move on. Like we all should right about now...
    Signature
    Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488105].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    Cripes, I'll make one last reply. You were banned on July 30, 2009 at 11:46pm .. so if you tried before that and couldn't get in then it wasn't our fault. Hmm, how many months is that, almost six? :-)

    Ok, peace out, last post on this subject. Yah I know (sigh!)

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488154].message }}
    • Originally Posted by ud View Post

      Cripes, I'll make one last reply. You were banned on July 30, 2009 at 11:46pm .. so if you tried before that and couldn't get in then it wasn't our fault. Hmm, how many months is that, almost six? :-)

      Ok, peace out, last post on this subject. Yah I know (sigh!)

      /ud
      I was supposedly banned on July 30, 2009 but your site claimed on June 4, 2009 that I had already been banned. How does that work??

      Angela From Aberdeen - The Netscape Unofficial FAQ

      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488180].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ud
        Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards View Post

        I was supposedly banned on July 30, 2009 but your site claimed on June 4, 2009 that I had already been banned. How does that work??

        Angela From Aberdeen - The Netscape Unofficial FAQ

        We have a grace period which will allow a banned user to come back in, maybe apologize, enter an explanation and so on after which the user is either reinstated of permanently banned. Yes, your account was removed but it was placed in the holding bin. And AFAIK, you're still allowed to re-register but you never emailed the admin to make any sort of inquiries, etc.

        I didn't realize that the "Angela From Aberdeen" post was still there, it's gone now.

        /ud

        /ud
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488204].message }}
  • So if my account was "in a holding bin" or whatever, that means I STILL couldn't get in when I tried, right?

    All I know is that I tried to get in a couple weeks after leaving my post and I could not get in. I don't send emails to website owners "pleading my case" because if they don't like my links they don't have to keep them there. I don't intend to hassle them or anything. Their website; their choice. I DO like keeping up with online people but I don't have a lot of time to keep up even with my favorite forums, including this one.
    Signature
    -----------------------------------------


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488542].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MarkAse
    I don't think it's too complicated to say that these link packets fall into the gray area between spam and not spam. Now leaving messages on these forums definitely takes it into full spam territory.

    I have been extremely impressed by Terry's WSO btw.
    Signature

    My current project, the Uncorked Ventures Wine Club. More coming soon, here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488645].message }}
    • Originally Posted by MarkAse View Post

      I don't think it's too complicated to say that these link packets fall into the gray area between spam and not spam. Now leaving messages on these forums definitely takes it into full spam territory.

      I have been extremely impressed by Terry's WSO btw.
      That's probably the most accurate description I've heard, Mark. However, remember that my link packets no longer include these types of sites. I find those types, but I don't give them out...in order to keep the sites from being abused.
      Signature
      -----------------------------------------


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488737].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SherryLee
    Can someone please clarify what Angela's backlinks are, exactly?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1488649].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author WareTime
      Originally Posted by SherryLee View Post

      Can someone please clarify what Angela's backlinks are, exactly?
      Links spam conveyed in a forum profile. You join a forum soley under the guise of being a normal participant and put your links to ALL NATURAL ACNE CURE in your signature hoping to get your links crawled by search engines.

      To all forum operators you can do two things to make sure these links if they do get in your site don't help the spammers.

      1. Set your profile pages viewable to only logged in members.
      2. Exclude them from being crawled via robots.txt

      Let Google show you how.
      Block or remove pages using a robots.txt file - Webmaster Tools Help
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1738932].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ud
    I'll treat this reply as a courtesy to answer your question but I really don't care to pursue this any longer:

    that means I STILL couldn't get in when I tried, right?
    When a user is relegated to the holding bin they can surely log back in which case we are alerted and take appropriate action to either ban permanently or grant conditional access. Like I said, if you couldn't access the site then there was some problem on your end, such as cookies for instance not being cleared (common problem). There has been an occasional glitch so maybe you got glitched, who knows and we don't do the "bin" any longer. I just checked again and you ARE able to gain access but you have to re-register which you indicate non-interest but the fact remains you CAN.

    /ud
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1489048].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 2d0k
    Mmm.. An interesting read..

    If both of you, Ud and Angela, will continue in this line of reasoning, this would get you nowhere as every claim would be met with a counterclaim.. Why not meet halfway? Angela already stated that she no longer includes this type of back-linking, constructively saying that she made an HONEST mistake because people are abusing the forums with this type of link.. As to ud, you said peace out.. Then peace is given to Angela.. right? Best of luck this Christmas to you all..
    Signature

    Hasta La Victoria Siempre!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1490937].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jigarv
      Completely support Angela on this.... she has cleared all the questions raised against her
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1573967].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author echealth
        I have a quick question. Angela's packets have been very good to me as have Paul's. But for giggles was researching backlinks and noticed that her own pages that she promotes have a pretty low pr. So do in fact, most of these backlinking sites and services. I do realize that PR is not everything or possibly anything depending on who you talk to. But I believe it to be important at least a little bit, and was pretty surprised at the findings.
        I am not at all upset with the packets but would love to hear some guesses as to the pr of her site, if I were to guess I would say that her site might have an internal issue linking or otherwise or has been penalized somehow (obviously not in the serps that much).
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1623144].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
          Originally Posted by echealth View Post

          I have a quick question. Angela's packets have been very good to me as have Paul's. But for giggles was researching backlinks and noticed that her own pages that she promotes have a pretty low pr. So do in fact, most of these backlinking sites and services. I do realize that PR is not everything or possibly anything depending on who you talk to. But I believe it to be important at least a little bit, and was pretty surprised at the findings.
          I am not at all upset with the packets but would love to hear some guesses as to the pr of her site, if I were to guess I would say that her site might have an internal issue linking or otherwise or has been penalized somehow (obviously not in the serps that much).
          I don't know, I just checked them and her backlinks page is PR4, and the Go Articles if 5. I wouldn't exactly call that low. Most of the higher PR sites out there are either (1) pretty big budgeted with advertising $$ and a resulting "buzz" about them, or (2) sites with loads and loads of content that people have steadily linked into over a significant period of time. Obviously there are exceptions, but for all of the keywords that I'm trying to rank for right now (all fairly competitive), the highest PR of any root domain is a PR5, with most being a PR3.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1623292].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author echealth
            I found her backlinks page to be a pr3 actually, but my point was if she is creating all these packets and so forth I would expect a higher pr for her as she is the first the one to these sites before they are published even. Additionally there is only 162 backlinks to the entire page and 1300 to the entire site, I would have expected much better numbers. I am not belittling the packets at all, I would in fact have much more work if I didn't have them, and they are even more valuable as an education on good link building. But what kind of discourages me from going after these anymore for my sites is that I don't believe that they would help me that much anymore. My bottom line question relates to google's algorithm and why it doesn't assign her a higher pr because she in fact deserves it, she has great backlinks even if there aren't an overwhelming amount. Lets also remember that tons of people link to her in blog posts anyways because she is an internet celebrity of sorts. It would be much more encouraging to me if I saw her with a higher pr as it would definitively tell me that backlink building is very important, whereas now I am tending to think that you only need enough to get started and then maybe content would be more important. I would still recommend any new site start with the packets but maybe after completing a few concentrating on have a clean site and keeping it dynamic.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1624520].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Good for Angela. If you go to my site you will find next to no backlinks. The first thing lots of people do when they see a backlink system owner's sites is check the sites backlinks. Using your backlinks on your own site compromises the list. I use very few of my own although I may use backlinks that I come across that I didn't search for myself.

    It might sound strange but posting proof of the effectiveness of your backlinks is actually the fastest way to give spammers your valuable work for free and destroy the list. They just use backlink checkers just like you did and then flood those sites with all kinds of garbage.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1624573].message }}
  • Actually, I have NEVER used a backlink on any other page of my site except my "Angela" page. And for over a year, that page had a Page Rank of 5. So did my "Backlinks" Goarticle.

    This last PR Go-Round, Google reduced the PR of MANY sites, including mine. I know this because a ton of the sites I found for my list I could no longer use, as they are now PR 5, not the PR 6 they were when I found them. (I thought I was having a bad nightmare, lol. ) My site is only 2 1/2 years old. And my Angela page had a PR of 5 for at least a year. So I would say that a 1 1/2 year old site that has a page on it that's a PR 5 is pretty good; you'd know this if you looked at sites and pages that are in the PR 4 and PR 5 range. There are millions of content-filled, beautiful sites that have been around for years with this sort of Page Rank and lower.

    However, the Page Rank of my own site is not my goal. My goal is getting my site/articles/blogs/whatever to the top of Google's Search Engine. And for that, these links work beautifully. Most "regular folks" (Non-IM people) never even notice the Page Rank of a website. Nor do most of them care. But they sure do care about what sites they find when they do Google Searches. That's what makes the money, folks, not the actual Page Rank of the site.

    There are tons of PR 6, 7, and even 8 on page 156 and lower in Google's Search Engine. Their Page Rank isn't doing them a whole lot of good, is it...unless it's just for "bragging purposes".
    Signature
    -----------------------------------------


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1625516].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    It would be much more encouraging to me if I saw her with a higher pr as it would definitively tell me that backlink building is very important, whereas now I am tending to think that you only need enough to get started and then maybe content would be more important.
    Well, the problem is you don't have a very strong understanding of how backlinking and page rank work.

    page rank has very little and perhaps nothing to do with SE ranking.

    the style of backlinking that AngelaE promotes is to boost SE rankings, not page rank.
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1625552].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author echealth
      I don't believe that anyone has a strong understanding of pr vs serp rankings, if you do please do tell. To say for sure that there is 0 mathematical relationship between the two is short sighted, and I agree that it is possible to rank with 0 pr, but isn't it easier with higher pr? Google trust is reflected in pr that much is certain.
      All I am saying is that if Angela had a higher pr, for me anyways the packets would be even more valuable. But to my knowledge, the only system as good as hers is article writing and publishing which is tedious and gut wrenching and if I were a pro at SEO (and I am not) I would have all my clients do her packets even if only 1/4 of the links were indexed. It was just eye opening for me to see her site's pr (which she deftly explained).
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1625930].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by echealth View Post

        All I am saying is that if Angela had a higher pr, for me anyways the packets would be even more valuable. .
        I suppose so but I get the impression you are a little unrealistic. Hitting a PR5 at all is pretty good. Do you realize household names like Target, Sears etc are all just PR7? Warriors is a PR4 and is probably the premier forum for Internet marketing.

        But again a backlink system seller that has a higher PR site is doing something wrong if he/she is using their own backlinks. A lower PR site for a backlink seller usually means that they are no exposing the links to backlink checkers which is a good thing.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1626138].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      Well, the problem is you don't have a very strong understanding of how backlinking and page rank work.

      page rank has very little and perhaps nothing to do with SE ranking.
      I'm actually tired of seeing this posted from time to time as fact. Its false. Because one page with little PR can outrank a site with High PR for a given term it does NOT mean that PR has nothing to do with ranking. There are ton loads of examples of HIGH PR sites that outrank lower PR sites and I got to tell in my experience it is still relatively rare for a zero PR page to rank in the top five for a really competitive term.

      Yes relevance and on page SEO will get some sites to jump over higher PR sites but ahigh PR site just as well optimized on page will usually spank the low and no PR page around the block right back to its crib. The exception is not the rule.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1626084].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
    Gotta agree that PR has little value, and Google seems to hand it out like candy on Halloween. All my sites were PR0-1 a few months ago, but with the latest update I got 2 PR4s, 2 PR3s, a PR2, and a bunch were upped to a PR1. I'm not sure what I did, but it didn't move any of them up in the rankings. So... big whoop is pretty much what I thought.
    Signature
    Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1629476].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by tjcocker View Post

      Gotta agree that PR has little value, and Google seems to hand it out like candy on Halloween. All my sites were PR0-1 a few months ago, but with the latest update I got 2 PR4s, 2 PR3s, a PR2, and a bunch were upped to a PR1. I'm not sure what I did, but it didn't move any of them up in the rankings. So... big whoop is pretty much what I thought.
      Note that:

      Site A is PR0 on Jan1st.

      Site A gets officially bumped to PR3 on Feb 1st.

      Well, on on January 31st your site really had a value of a PR3 in the eyes of google, even if the little PR checker showed a PR0.

      So, you shouldn't expect a jump in the rankings when your site officially jumps up in PR because presumably the PR was already built into the rankings.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1629643].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pavionjsl
    Just wonder with all the packs that are sold on forums, shared through other sites, linking loophole, evo, and every other profile creating tool on the face of the earth.........how does this end up being a solid long term answer for ranking. Short term maybe but with all the time and effort, its not a viable horse to ride long term. Now I guess if its just about today we all keep doing the latest fad, push buttons and hope for the short term best. We keep buying the next great tool and forgetting that once someone stops by a site they average less then 2 minutes there. I have a article in the insurance niche that's on the first page for a search term above progressives site. That to me is better then a profile link and might be more beneficial in the long run.

    If the goal is to get better here in marketing on the internet we have to become better and better at what is real and more beneficial is all I am saying. Course Im a idiot so that's just my 2 cents.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1739461].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jazbo
      Hi

      Bearing in mind many marketers on here are promoting short-term affiliate sites, and are looking for quick wins, I don't really see the problem, IF you assume all profile links are short term link (which is no more untrue thatn for any other sort of link).

      Or are you saying that people should be bedding in their acne cure sites to be number one in fives years time? Its simply not going to happen.


      Whatever the site, mix it up.

      Originally Posted by pavionjsl View Post

      Just wonder with all the packs that are sold on forums, shared through other sites, linking loophole, evo, and every other profile creating tool on the face of the earth.........how does this end up being a solid long term answer for ranking. Short term maybe but with all the time and effort, its not a viable horse to ride long term. Now I guess if its just about today we all keep doing the latest fad, push buttons and hope for the short term best. We keep buying the next great tool and forgetting that once someone stops by a site they average less then 2 minutes there. I have a article in the insurance niche that's on the first page for a search term above progressives site. That to me is better then a profile link and might be more beneficial in the long run.

      If the goal is to get better here in marketing on the internet we have to become better and better at what is real and more beneficial is all I am saying. Course Im a idiot so that's just my 2 cents.
      Signature
      Need A Writer? Reliable, UK-Based, 5 Years Experience
      No Outsourcing, Just Me - Contentandlinks.com
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1739508].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      [DELETED]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1739736].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
        Why won't this thread die already. Someone does a search on here or something, and just decides to comment on threads that had their last post a month ago?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1740073].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pavionjsl
    I agree mixing it up is important. Many links methods are available that are long term besides articles. But starting with better basics is good also. One of the first being better content that converts better and ranks better. If we are all just short term selling each other sites we set up a month ago generating 1000 profile links using an xrummer and calling that internet marketing, I guess I missed the memo.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1739585].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lincoln Ryan
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1784234].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by Lincoln Ryan View Post

      can't believe people are wasting time with link packets. What an incredible waste of time.
      Are you saying this because (1) you believe forum profiles don't work, or (2) (2) Angela's and Paul's packets are oversubscribed?

      If its #1, note that between Terry Kyle and I, we now have 5 different pages now in the top 25 of Google for the search: backlinks. (Ok, I only have 1 of them :rolleyes:, but Terry has the other 4). Plus, each of the 5 are on completely different domains.

      If its #2, Angela's and Paul's packets aren't the only game in town.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1784495].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ape263
    Hello all. You know Angela, I've been wanting to ask you something for some time. Have you ever considered created another list that will have a limited amount of users? I get you and Paul's packets, and they are great products, they have helped me out with a lot of my sites (about 7 or 8), but with so many people using the packets, site owners (not all of course, but enough) are very quick to react to these "attacks" as they call them.

    Do you think either of you would ever consider creating another, separate list each month? Thank you for your time.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1784310].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by ape263 View Post

      Hello all. You know Angela, I've been wanting to ask you something for some time. Have you ever considered created another list that will have a limited amount of users?
      I know of three packet sellers that limit their subscribers. Do a search in the WSO section. Theres no shortage of packet providers.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1784704].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Gary Becks