Google penalties

Yes, it is still breaking the rules, but for some webmasters, they have no other choice but to buy links to their sites. If Google went through their index, and deleted every single site that has ever bought a link from another site, then there wouldn't really be much left in the search engine.

Buying a link from a website in order to manipulate PR is something that is wrong ( and which Google are doing something about ), but if you buy a link that has a Nofollow tag - is that still something that Google will ban you for ???

I agree with what you are saying, and on paper - its all fine - but in the real world - it just ain't like that.

Alex

 

If you use the nofollow link then it's perfectly fine, that link with have zero effect on search engine results. To say if they would have no index left is just silly, at most maybe 20% of the sites would be penalized, and thats probably a over shot anyways. We see a lot of complaints about text link penalities and think "Wow, everyone does it!" but really it's all from a webmaster forum that we would expect to see those complaints

 

I believe Google should go and fix their faulty system and stop this crap. It penalizes a lot of legit backlinks in the process. Not saying people should continue doing their stuff. But most of the fault is on google here and not other people.

 

The fault is on the people who did it, if it wasn't as wide spread as it was Google would of left it be, like they did for quite a long time. The problem is people starting abusing it majorly and it started effecting search results greatly. Didn't you notice the huge shift when they rolled out the penalties during the last update?

Also, maybe 0.01% of legit sites got penalized, the way the web works is majority of sites are all interlinked, so maybe YOUR site never bought or sold a text link but your backlinks did, or their backlinks did and the effect rolled down hill and the true pagerank of sites started to show.

 

I understand what you mean "ssandecki" but that doesnt solve the problem.

I dont try to cheat the system, but my competetion is doing great by doing so. But beside that, The GOOGLE system should not be so easily manipulated,

another person should NOT be able to bring me down by getting any kind of links for my site, as you said 'CHEATING'.

There should be penalties for people who cheat, BUT what about protection for sites being targeted by nasty competitors in unetical ways, because they know Google has a WEAK spot !!!

 

When you put your website into your signature, you promote it. The fact of the matter is that you promote it for free. What's wrong if I want to pay for that promotion? You are manipulating the SERPs so do I, but I invest some money.
I know how the algorithm works as much as you do. For this reason you decided to manipulate the SERP, but you do it for free. Which site is more likely to be a spam? The one that was put a lot of money into or the one promoted for free?

 

I see your point. That is why I said Google can blame people for buying back links but it is perfectly legal. If it was not legal than they would have a point. Basically they have built a system around something that is legal and are trying to stop people from using it.

 

This is why they penalize the sellers site and not the buyer, this prevents competition from doing what you just mentioned, if they did it to you, they would of just wasted their money and actually have boosted you for a short time. Remember, they give penalties to the site selling text links, the buyer site is in-directly hurt because they no longer get juice from their investment.

 

I think if Google can scrap the PR system altogether, then the whole concept of manipulating links for PR juice and better SERPs will slowly start to fade away.

However, the idea that if you buy a link from another website can result in your site being banned from Google, then that is just plain silly. Many legitimate web owners can suddenly find themselves out of Google without realising they have done anything wrong.

In Googles webmasters guidelines, it says ...

"Make sure that other sites link to yours
Links help our crawlers find your site and can give your site greater visibility in our search results."

Now, if you want you to get links from other sites ( especially in the same niche as your own ), then trying to ask for a free link from a specific site to yours will often result in a big "No way". For many webmasters, the only way that they can get relevant links is to pay for them.

The webmasters guidelines also says ....
"Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or "bad neighborhoods" on the web, as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links. "

It clearly points out that buying links for Pagerank is a No-No - but it doesnt mention anything about buying relevant nofollow links for traffic.

I think the whole buying a text link thing is a pretty grey area at the moment. Until Google come out and state clearly what is allowed, what isn't, and what will result in a ban, people will still be buying links for PR, as well as for traffic to their sites.

Alex

 

It was never legal to buy text links.

http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66356

Now check the back dated pages in archive.org

 

I am not sute about that. In this last weeks de-indexing, many sites that did not cheat got de-indeded for a few days and came back with a -50 penalty. There are not all selling links. The peanlty was given to sites recieving liks as well. The sellers probably just got hit with PR reduction

 

It was illegal for Google but the web has had no rules about it. Remember google.com does not run the web. They may count it as illegal but not against web standards.

I'm not sure if i am explaining myself but what I am saying it does not violate any specific national or international law....so the problem is whith the search engines.

 

You don't have a concept of the algorithm I can tell, you have backlinks obviously to rank in search engine and have pagerank, those backlinks either got a penalty or their backlinks did and so on. Go on wikipedia and read on the Google algorithm theory.

 

According to that page, it states ....

"Links intended to manipulate PageRank
Links to web spammers or bad neighborhoods on the web
Excessive reciprocal links or excessive link exchanging ("Link to me and I'll link to you.")
Buying or selling links that pass PageRank "

Now what would happen if a webmaster today, went to that page and read that Buying links for pagerank is wrong - they would clearly understand that trying to manipulate PR is something to avoid.

However, it doesn't mention anything about buying or selling links ( nofollow or follow ) that pass on traffic.

At the end of the day, isn't buying a related to your niche nofollow text link that same as using Adwords ?? Both don't pass on any PR. Both won't have an effect on your SERPs, but both will pass you traffic to your site from visitors who are interested in what your site has to offer.

Alex

 

They don't run the web, but they run and own Google Search stock, lock and barrel. So they can make any rules they want, if you don't like it don't try to rank on them

I'm curious, who do YOU think should make web standards?

 

I agree with this totally and you actually back my opinion indirectly, thanks

 

Personally I believe web standards should be set by ICANN. I think its best to leave the web as little monitered as possible except for illegal activity of course. But the day when you have companies saying backlinks that are paid for are illegal I think is stepping too far.

I mind my ranking with google and that is why I do not buy backlinks. But I don't believe google should say its illegal to buy backlinks when you cannot stop them from crawling your page. Now what they should say is if you want to be indexed on our site please do not buy backlinks or we will penalize you.

 

Actually, just been looking more closer at the Google guidelines, and it also states ....


In addition, submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.

Now, correct me if I am wrong, but if you have a business website, and want to submit it to the Yahoo Directory, you have to pay something like $300. So in this sense, Google is actually saying - go and pay for this link !!

Ssandecki - glad we are on the same wavelength. I hope my posts didn't come across as though I was having a go at you. To be honest, I am really enjoying this post, and the views and thoughts of everyone participating in it.

Alex

 

ICANN handles the standards for the internet domain name system, not web standards. Who don't even enforce their policies anyways. Anyone else on your list

You can stop Google from crawling your pages with the robots.txt standard or the robots meta tag. Again, you cannot tell what Google and cannot due with their search engine rules wise, or your contradiciting your arguement you started with

 

I know the concept "ssandecki", I understand sites get affected if their back links get affeted or devalued etc...lets not get into that.

what i am saying is, devalued BLs is one thing, but complete de-indexed for a few days means YOU did something worng, not just the sites that your BLs are coming from.

Also, getting -50 for every search term...meaning you are exactly 50 results down from where you were is def not by chance, it has been done specifically to peanlize your site.....so its not just a drop in the sites SERPs because they lost some BLs or somw of their BLs got devalued. Its more to it then just that.