Best way for one way outbound link?

Discussion in 'Link Development' started by Francisco Aloy, Jan 14, 2005.

  1. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #41
    None whatsoever, it is however a remark that says more about the person who delivers it than the intended recipient.

    Sure, message #12 in this thread as follows:

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 22, 2005 IP
  2. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #42
    Wasting bandwidth is of course your opinion. Others perhaps more inquiring and analytical than yourself have sent messages of thanks for shedding some light on the subject. I make no apologies for boring you and you do not have to contribute if you have nothing constructive to say.

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 22, 2005 IP
  3. compar

    compar Peon

    Messages:
    2,705
    Likes Received:
    169
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #43
    You're right I did say it. I didn't recognize it taken slightly out of context as it was in your accusation. But the statement is true, somepeople never will. In fact I believe that the math is accurate. I just don't believe that it is something worth obsessing about. In practical terms it is so close to zero as to not exist.
     
    compar, Jan 22, 2005 IP
  4. maverick

    maverick Peon

    Messages:
    1,191
    Likes Received:
    24
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #44
    So is it good to have OBLs on homepage itself? Will this affect homepage PR?
     
    maverick, Jan 28, 2005 IP
  5. tomsey

    tomsey Peon

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #45
    Just found this forum. Great forum!

    Thank you Micheal for the good information.

    Micheal, if you wanted to stop pr passing to an "about us" or "privacy" page or an affiliate program link, would you use a php arrangement like the via system or would you use the new nofollow google tag?


    Thanks for your help.


    Also, a less related question:

    With the sitemap, is it better to put a link to it on all pages of a site or is it better just to put a link to it from the homepage only? I'm thinking homepage only because this way the other pages will have more pr to push back toward the main pages, with one less link on them. Any thoughts?


    Thanks again.
     
    tomsey, Jan 28, 2005 IP
  6. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #46
    Sure it is good to have OBLs anywhere they are useful to the visitor and no it will not change the PR of the page.

    I wouldn't bother to use either on an "about us" or "privacy" page because presumably these pages will not have any external links but will have links to other internal pages. For an affiliate program link there may be circumstances where I would use the new tag.

    I don't think it will make any practical difference not least because a site map will not have any external links. Personally I like to see a text link to the site map and home page in the footer of every page.

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  7. tomsey

    tomsey Peon

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #47
    Ok, thanks Micheal.

    The reason I am asking about the about us page is because if you blocked it off, you would have more page pr to pass to the other pages right? Or does it not matter because the about us page is feeding back into the other pages on the site? What about a terms and conditions page that you want to include on every page of the site? You wouldnt block it off to stop pr going to it so there would be more pr to be channeled to where you want it to go?


    Thanks.
     
    tomsey, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  8. NewComputer

    NewComputer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    68
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    188
    #48
    I have yet to see any site anywhere on the internet suffer from PR leak. I have not read this entire thread, but I have looked high and low into a page that is experiencing PR leak.
     
    NewComputer, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  9. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #49
    You cannot create RAW PR and assuming that the about us page is not orphaned then there is nothing to be gained by 'blocking it off'.

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  10. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #50
    Michael, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  11. tomsey

    tomsey Peon

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #51

    not create it but channel it towards some pages over others
     
    tomsey, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  12. NewComputer

    NewComputer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    68
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    188
    #52
    Michael,

    In one breath you say "How would you determine if it was or was not suffering from PR leak?" and yet you defend that it is happening all around you. I have yet to see anyone here prove that it exists besides quoting other resources from people who don't know that it exists either. Blind leading the blind. Only G knows if there is PR leaking taking place and they are not telling anyone. The rest is speculation...
     
    NewComputer, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  13. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #53
    You said "I have yet to see any site anywhere on the internet suffer from PR leak". I asked "How would you determine if it was or was not suffering from PR leak?" In plain words what was your criteria for deciding that you had not seen it?

    I agree the blind are leading the blind.

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 29, 2005 IP
    ResaleBroker likes this.
  14. NewComputer

    NewComputer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    68
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    188
    #54
    I have no idea, because no one can prove it exists...
     
    NewComputer, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  15. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #55
    Well if you have no idea what your criteria were for arriving at your conclusion I am afraid I cannot help you.

    In the deepest philosophical sense that is true of everything but if you take the Brin and Page calculation as axiomatic then it exists by definition.

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  16. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #56
    At best and if at all, that would be in a hypothetical universe with zero relevance to actual web pages.

    Stop scaring people with this nonsense, Michael -- now we have another thread going here with people worrying about how to stop something that doesn't exist.
     
    minstrel, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  17. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #57
    Ah! Now I think I can see a glimpse of one of your problems - you do not fully understand cause and effect perhaps :)

    You will notice that I have confined my comments on this topic to this thread. You however are prepared to recite your very own misguided thoughts on this subject at every opportunity anywhere on the board. I saw that you recently posted (shouted) without any explanation "THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PR LEAKAGE" in a newer thread on this topic.

    It does not surprise me if people are "worrying" as you say they are. As this thread demonstrates you express an opinion and are then unable to provide any coherent reason why you believe it to be true or engage in any technical discussion on the calculation of RAW PR.

    It is of course your prerogative to attempt debate without rational thought but please not with me :D

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 29, 2005 IP
  18. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #58
    I think you should re-read this thread, Michael. I have provided more than one reason -- you just choose to ignore them and continue to cite articles that most of us are already aware of and none of which prove your point. Why would I or anyone else want to engage in a technical discussion of a fictional entity which, by your own admission, has no impact on real-world web pages?

    Now that I will agree with -- debating with you is pointless.
     
    minstrel, Jan 30, 2005 IP
  19. Michael

    Michael Raider

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    92
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #59
    Not one coherent reason as I said.

    For your own education perhaps? That should be no observable impact btw.

    Snipping sentences to change the inference so you can agree is a naive ploy. What I actually said "It is of course your prerogative to attempt debate without rational thought but please not with me".

    - Michael
     
    Michael, Jan 30, 2005 IP
  20. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #60
    I'm aware of what you said and so is anyone else reading this thread. I changed the quote (with ellipsis so there'd be no question that something was left out) to make a point myself: There is no point in debating this with you under any circumstances.

    You are determined to have the last word: Go ahead. I leave this absurd and meaningless thread to you.
     
    minstrel, Jan 30, 2005 IP