Directories versus Linkbaiting

[onlinedude]

There have been a lot of attacks lately in the blogosphere against directories.

For instance, Matt Cutts has declared that paid links are bad. Unfortunately many people in the blogosphere choose to interpret this as directory submissions are bad (which is obviously incorrect, as you are paying for an editorial review when submitting to a directory and Google guidelines specifically mention submitting to DMOZ and Yahoo! Directory). See, for instance, the recent discussion:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=315709

Unfortunately, this is starting to take its toll on directory submissions:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=2995458

SEOs are primary submitters to directories:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=318579

If SEOs believe this nonsense, then submissions could dry up. I think it's important that people in the directory industry start taking a more vocal stand against this line of thinking and showing the benefits of directory submissions.

For instance, today there was an attack on directories by Cornwall SEO:
http://www.cornwallseo.com/search/in...link-building/

I've responded to this here:
http://www.avivadirectory.com/downloadblog/?p=287

[paidhosting]

Just like every industry someone is pissed off at others cause they are unable to do what others can do simple as that.

IF submissions dry up where and how are seos going to get any links to their sites?

[wwws]

Nice post Jeff. There are all sorts of attacks going on and I just had ot take a stance on one of them today.

[an0n]

Oh i'm liking this post a lot, jeff

for some reason or another, i wound up here:
http://www.avivadirectory.com/intern...-inside-scoop/

Originally Posted by wwws

Nice post Jeff. There are all sorts of attacks going on and I just had ot take a stance on one of them today.

you didn't take a stance on shit. wake up already.

[malcolm1]

What Matt Cutts said was "Paid For Links" to high PR ranking Sites 8-9-10
for the chance of thier sites getting higher PR... EX: New site links to a few PR8-9s and a Bunch of 7s
only so that when its ranked its PR6+ which is falsed PR and why i think they did a general PR ruction of PR.

Here is a what i believe to be a bigger rep of google...

http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/...m-lasnik.shtml

basically now up to us to do damage control...

thx
malcolm

[onlinedude]

Originally Posted by an0n

Oh i'm liking this post a lot, jeff

for some reason or another, i wound up here:
http://www.avivadirectory.com/intern...-inside-scoop/

That may be a more important post :-)

Originally Posted by malcolm1

http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/...m-lasnik.shtml

Good find - I hadn't seen that one.

[templates]

Originally Posted by malcolm1

What Matt Cutts said was "Paid For Links" to high PR ranking Sites 8-9-10 for the chance of thier sites getting higher PR... EX: New site links to a few PR8s and a Bunch of 7s only so that when its ranked its PR6+ which is falsed PR.

Here is a what i believe to be a bigger rep of google...

http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/...m-lasnik.shtml

basically now up to us to do damage control...

thx
malcolm

thnxs for the link malcolm1..what is it i can do to promote our services and let it be known that its for the good of website owners to submit link?

[wwws]

Originally Posted by an0n

you didn't take a stance on shit. wake up already.

Can't we leave this out of here. Geez Just wants to keep protecting he's interest.

[Blogmaster]

Originally Posted by an0n

Oh i'm liking this post a lot, jeff

for some reason or another, i wound up here:
http://www.avivadirectory.com/intern...-inside-scoop/

yeah never know how I wind up clicking on stuff like that either

[jhnrang]

I have been a vocal promoter against all those so-called SEO experts who just creates confusion among webmasters.

I have been participating on Matt Cutts BLOG post about paid links. And I'll post the URLs of my post here after I digg around 600 comments from there

On his Post --he referred to a BLOG -- pronetadvertising as following a Good ol --SEO technique to get Good traffic and Matt praised it. What I did was dugg out the backlinks of that BLOG and predicted that blog would go to PR7 from PR6 because the BLOG owner was manipulating or buying some high PR backlinks.

I agained questioned Matt what he did about that BLOG yesterday.

Bottomline --WE MUST FORM AN ASSOCIATION AND YOU JEFF AND CHRISH WILL SHOW US THE WAY. IF WE ARE UNITED --SEO fools WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PUT A SINGLE SITE ON TOP AS THEY DO NOW. THEY NEED US MORE THAN WE NEED THEM --NECAUSE WHATEVER IS THE CONCEPTION --WEBMASTERS WILL KEEP SUBMITTING TO US --. IF ALL THE DIRECTORY INDUSTRY IS UNITED WE CAN BAN SEO FIRMS --AND ONLY ALLOW INDIVIDUAL SUBMISSIONS

[jl255]

Quote from interview with lasnik:

Eric Enge: It seems to me that one of the more challenging aspects of all of this is that people have gotten really good at buying a link that show no indication that they are purchased.

Adam Lasnik: Yes and no, actually. One of the things I think Matt has commented about in his blog; it's what we joking refer to as famous last words, which is "well, I have come up with a way to buy links that is completely undetectable".

As people have pointed out, Google buys advertising, and a lot of other great sites engage in both the buying and selling of advertising. There is no problem with that whatsoever. The problem is that we've seen quite a bit of buying and selling for the very clear purpose of transferring PageRank. Some times we see people out there saying "hey, I've got a PR8 site" and, this will give you some great Google boost, and I am selling it for just three hundred a month. Well, that's blunt, and that's clearly in violation of the "do not engage in linking schemes that are not permitted within the webmaster guidelines".

Hmm..... looks like we need to rephrase our offers?

But think bottomline is this: purchasing of marketing links for advertising and traffic is fine and good. But purchasing links for the SOLE-PURPOSE of gaining PR from that link is frowned upon. So as long as our directories are able to provide advertising & traffic in addition to PR, then we should be ok.

[Blogmaster]

Originally Posted by jhnrang

I have been a vocal promoter against all those so-called SEO experts who just creates confusion among webmasters.

I have been participating on Matt Cutts BLOG post about paid links. And I'll post the URLs of my post here after I digg around 600 comments from there

On his Post --he referred to a BLOG -- pronetadvertising as following a Good ol --SEO technique to get Good traffic and Matt praised it. What I did was dugg out the backlinks of that BLOG and predicted that blog would go to PR7 from PR6 because the BLOG owner was manipulating or buying some high PR backlinks.

I agained questioned Matt what he did about that BLOG yesterday.

Bottomline --WE MUST FORM AN ASSOCIATION AND YOU JEFF AND CHRISH WILL SHOW US THE WAY. IF WE ARE UNITED --SEO fools WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PUT A SINGLE SITE ON TOP AS THEY DO NOW. THEY NEED US MORE THAN WE NEED THEM --NECAUSE WHATEVER IS THE CONCEPTION --WEBMASTERS WILL KEEP SUBMITTING TO US --. IF ALL THE DIRECTORY INDUSTRY IS UNITED WE CAN BAN SEO FIRMS --AND ONLY ALLOW INDIVIDUAL SUBMISSIONS

The thing is that Matt accomplishes more by posting than his team of programmers by programming. The ones who fall in the trap are the usual suckups!

[banless]

I have not seen a drop in submissions because of this, but I will say this, those who claim to be seo's yet at the same time believe this kind of garbage have no business calling themself an seo.

All links help in terms of serps, granted some are more powerful than others but in the end they can all add up to top rankings on the search engines.

These people need to face that facts that directories have been here since day one and it is clear that from the way the market is heating up that they will most likely continue to be a dominate force when it comes to link building.

[jhnrang]

Originally Posted by Blogmaster

The thing is that Matt accomplishes more by posting than his team of programmers by programming. The ones who fall in the trap are the usual suckups!

Well

--it seems my directory didn't fell in the trap. I left my directory's link on Matt Cutts' BLOG and it got PR6

But to be serious --here is how I questioned Matts' and Google's integrity
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to...comment-103642

Just posted on so-called SEO expert's BLOG threatening him--you may enjoy that too
http://www.cornwallseo.com/search/in.../#comment-5932

Well it seems my comment on this BLOG is under moderation --

[SasaVtec]

Originally Posted by onlinedude

There have been a lot of attacks lately in the blogosphere against directories.

For instance, Matt Cutts has declared that paid links are bad. Unfortunately many people in the blogosphere choose to interpret this as directory submissions are bad (which is obviously incorrect, as you are paying for an editorial review when submitting to a directory and Google guidelines specifically mention submitting to DMOZ and Yahoo! Directory). See, for instance, the recent discussion:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=315709

Unfortunately, this is starting to take its toll on directory submissions:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=2995458

SEOs are primary submitters to directories:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=318579

If SEOs believe this nonsense, then submissions could dry up. I think it's important that people in the directory industry start taking a more vocal stand against this line of thinking and showing the benefits of directory submissions.

For instance, today there was an attack on directories by Cornwall SEO:
http://www.cornwallseo.com/search/in...link-building/

I've responded to this here:
http://www.avivadirectory.com/downloadblog/?p=287

Great post Jeff, enjoyed reading it, have a small idea coming up

Originally Posted by wwws

Can't we leave this out of here. Geez Just wants to keep protecting he's interest.

Watch your self, roll your eyes all you want, but we see your 2nd face.

[wwws]

SasaVtec is An0ns boy! LMAO!

I see you like to give out Red reps too. Kids!

[SasaVtec]

Originally Posted by wwws

SasaVtec is An0ns boy! LMAO!

Please make a correction SasaVtec is An0ns Father! Laught all you want. Might as well go back to 6th grade


BTW I didnt leave that rep, I gave you a green a few days ago, so it said I couldnt give you green a few hours ago vs. popo

[wwws]

I been reading post and seem that you take a stand when someone disagree with An0n.

I don't know I had a few people told me (via IM's) that your An0ns boy....See some of your post.

The reds are there when you came around...coincidence?

[britishguy]

Originally Posted by banless

I have not seen a drop in submissions because of this, but I will say this, those who claim to be seo's yet at the same time believe this kind of garbage have no business calling themself an seo.

All links help in terms of serps, granted some are more powerful than others but in the end they can all add up to top rankings on the search engines.

These people need to face that facts that directories have been here since day one and it is clear that from the way the market is heating up that they will most likely continue to be a dominate force when it comes to link building.

I had to look hard to find a top post in this thread

But this is a top post from banless and pretty accurate too

[jhnrang]

Come ---onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn Guys

Please NOT AGAIN

As the subject of the thread is really very serious --I request all of you to forget other things and lets your ideas improve our unity/integrity to fight against those SEO fools and not against each other