Just In >>>> Matt Cutts answers my questions about bid directories

IMHO, he is not answering the question directly. He is just repeating the same thing he wrote in a blog post months ago. In the logical fallacy definition, this is called argumentum ad nauseam (argument from repetition). Since its not really an answer, I really don't know how or what to make out of it.

 

Yeah Matt has always been very diplomatic while answering questions on paid Links, But really a nice question put forward there... that blog post really had lot of comments. !

 

Aviva Directory - Matt Cutts on Bidding Directories

 

How about "free" country web directory where only sites related to the particular country are added?

For example, in a Hong Kong web directory, the owner/public can add as many Hong Kong sites as possible so that users would be able to view all the relevant Hong Kong sites at a glance instead of filtering results from any search engine.

Will google penalise this kind of free directory if it is set up for the convenience of users? (nothing to do with seo)

 

Homepage bid on bidding directory are for advertisements purpose.

I am wandering if they review sites that are bidding on adwords. Honestly, i never click those ads since I get lot's of MFA sites.

 

How can google know this?

 

I still think its a case of pot calling the kettle black.

Until a search engine can totally clear out all of the undesirable how can it do this.

 

Actually thats quite frank about bidding directories, i imagine we shall have to do a lot more to buttress the bidding concept directory, and keep them attractive to users

The bidding element is mostly advertising led, so how to do it right,,,

 

I don't have any idea how they will do this, But one thing is sure that they will be manually penalize all some of the bidding directoriess that make good money , that is how I think they will do it in the name of paid links.

 

In that case use "nofollow" if you wish to stay on the right side - or don't use it and risk some kind of penalization.

That's how I read it in terms of "how to do it right" - I think it is the first time MC has specifically mentioned bidding directories - and he wasn't exactly endorsing them was he?

 

I'm sure Google are being hot on unrelated links. So if you have a category on cakes and it is full of med links then your directory will appear spammy. If the description is stuffed full of keywords rather than being a description then it's spam. If the title is not the site title but filled with keywords then its spam.

Do you as a webmaster take the time to ensure titles, description and categories are correct and relevant. Do you actually visit the site. If you do you are doing a good job. If not then google will probably have you on their radar.

 

A database of high quality websites (Not Links) has always been the most important and valuable asset for a directory. It’s unfortunately the most lacking part of most of the directories started in the past few years. Editorial integrity is painfully difficult to maintain when money, sometimes large sums is involved.

 

Sigh, yet another vague response so filled with maybe's and might be's that it leads to only more questions of what does it really mean. "Just gives" - what does that mean exactly? If the sites listed are all truly reviewed does that take the "just gives" aspect out of it?

I'm not really a fan of the bidding directories but I see this comment as unclear and yet, interesting of itself. Is that how Google sees directories and paid directories in particular - sites that 'just give' links and advertising to other sites?

I don't see how G can honestly expect all webmasters to change how they sell advertising on their sites to follow vague, arbitrary, and ever-changing guidelines. Advertising has been around a lot longer than both Google and the Internet. While they might like to think so, Google's apparent attempt to dictate to webmasters what forms of paid advertising are acceptable will fail - the big players simply are not going to change the way they do business. And why should they? Do you think the New York Times or any of the other major media websites are going to redo their sites to nofollows and do all the other things Google wants done?

Could you just imagine this sort of thing in the print word? OK, all you newspapers out there, you will only print your advertising using blue ink, you must clearly indicate which ads have been paid for vs. which ones have been done through an exchange of services/products or are freely given to non-profits, and if you want to be listed in our directory you will do exactly what we want you to do even though we don't exactly explain what that is.

 

Matt's answer was as vague as a politician's. He needs to be more clear about penalties and specifics. That was not very useful at all. Not saying the discussion is not necessary, just that Matt's answer was cowardly. I'm sick of bowing to Goog. But I know you have to do it.

 

I agree about the vagueness, about half an hour ago i was having a little chat with my 3 yr old nephew, he is easy to understand and the chatter almost flows.

Maybe MC can take some tips from kids on communicating better and more clearly.

This isn't WW2, you dont have to send it by code dude, open up.