This is my first time posting, though I enjoy reading your blog regularly.

I hope I’m posting on an appropriate entry – our site (URI in my email domain) recently was penalized for what I believe was interpreted to be bad linking. The discussion on http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help-Tools/browse_thread/thread/e44e2e6b829a13d7/277db5205c8bc07f?lnk=st&q=tinyprints&pli=1 is the full digest if you have time to read it – could be interesting to others who have made the same mistakes as we have.

I’m posting here because I’ve seen related posts like this in the past asking for help when they seem to have run out of ideas on what could be causing the penalty. If our efforts over the past month and reconsideration filed address the penalty issue, we’ll be happier and better educated about SEO for it. But I am posting here in case perhaps we have not yet stumbled upon the penalty issue, and you could provide any enlightenment.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Ed

http://www.globalwebsitecreations.com/new/airdrie/airdrie-web-site-design.html

A question about reciprocal linking. If I reciprocate with people sepcifically within my industry, keeping the net very tight so that the links are completely relevant to my site, is there any limit to the number of sites that I should reciprocate with?

Regards

Ed

I would just like to thank you for posting your comment about the availability of content. I have found it to be the best description in terms of relevance regarding how important links are with regard to highlighting content etc, does that make sense

Having read through some of the interview (still reading through the rest) I do find this statement a little concerning: “Whenever you pay money to a social media consultant to try to show up on Digg, you are not paying for links. You are funding some creativity; you are sponsoring your page for some creativity.

It’s not like you held a gun to anyone and said “Okay, you have to link to me”. The people who link to the site are linking because it’s something compelling instead. So, there is still some editorial choice there.”

Historically small companies could build links themselves, possibly to begin with by purchasing links through decent directories etc. Surely the process of hiring “someone in the know” is every bit as devious, as actually placing the link yourself? Surely this idea will only help the bigger corporate players who can afford to pay whatever these people are charging? IMO these people are paying for links, whether it is directly placing the link, or indirectly placing the link.

Perhaps paid for links could just be given a lot less relevance in terms of passed on PR? Perhaps it is actually time for more “human” intervention in search engines, so that a real “human” element can actually help decide what websites were of real quality, or an authority on a subject.

An algorithm is great, but it is far from perfect!

That’s not a flaw. I think that’s actually the whole point of the Google algorithms. If the trusted expert would link to who ever gives him a call, then soon he wouldn’t be a trusted expert anymore. So if he does link to you, it says a lot about your site and business.

In the past for instance I mentioned Google buying links from Leweb
http://leweb3.com/

The sponsorship image links are part of the advertising package.

You might argue that you can discount those in some other way, but that immediately suggests that is bad, plus of course those links are frequently text links.

Ok so that is an offline event sponsorship, but there are the equivalent online only events, where you still have to pay for your “stand” in the exhibit hall online.
Sounds like an elaborate trade directory to me…

What happens if a blogger decided to run their own product showcase, with interviews of the people in the showcase, links from reviews etc – all for just $200 per exhibit

We are nearing paid reviews, they just need to all be placed in a category and be high quality.

Then there are event sponsorships. Did WordPress founder Matt Mullenweg buy a link for $1000 from WLTC?
http://weblogtoolscollection.com/plugin-competition-prizes/

David Airey was given a massive penalty last year, and one of the reasons was a competition. Since then tons of people have run giveaway competitions requesting links with specific anchor text, yet they still have search traffic.

You have never cleared up affiliate links, clean, clean with specific landing page, or with parameters.

It is strange, but on the webmaster blog there were instructions on how to clean up results if you run an affiliate program, then a little while later Aaron Wall who was using clean affiliate links noticed links being discounted.

Last year we had a year of Google telling us what isn’t allowed – how about a year of Google telling us what is allowed – very specifically with clear examples of dos and don’ts

Good posts Aaron Pratt. This is why I see social media as mostly bogus and filled with self promoting marketers who kiss each other daily. It’s hard to believe Google actually gives weight to links acquired in this way, but they certainly do. I can understand the idea of good content acquiring links, but all these blogs out there who do nothing at all but email friends to link to them, etc are ruining the internet…. not to mention the many SEO’s exploiting readers and Google and other engines in every way possible.

Well said, Doug!

http://www.searchengineguide.com/jennifer-laycock/theres-no-shortcut-for-link-building-a-c.php

Do a search and you will find all kinds of unholy “relationships” driving current organic search results. How do those trying to follow the “guidelines” compete with that?

Need another example? Say I sell a new brand of “garden rake” and want to rank high in Google. All I need to do is send a “trusted” blogger, reporter who gardens, anyone with a domain a free sample and develop an email, IM relationship with them, then in a few days start asking for favors (links).

In some cases bloggers are contacting people who sell cool products and asking for free samples for links. Do I need to say more?

Well why not, ever see a blog post (from a trusted expert) out there titled something like, “An open discussion about garden rakes” ranking in the top #5 in Google? Focus your bullshit meter down a little deeper and you might just determine a few relationships that are unholy. No algorithm has yet to develop a meter to sniff out snake oil. Link based algorithms are failing in many ways currently…

Michael Martinez – You attention getting posts bore me.