I really hope I'm posting in the right section. I have a question about these penalties Google is levying against websites with toxic backlinks on low quality sites. Now, we all know that Google is penalizing sites for having backlinks on low quality sites. But why is this enforcement so biased? What about sites like http://sethgodin.typepad.com/, with over 2 million backlinks, many of which are definitely toxic? Or sites like eBay.com, Craigslist.com and the hundreds of others being linked to out the wazoo? None of these sites are being penalized despite the fact that they have many more toxic backlinks than all of our backlinks combined. What if I could manage to generate 2 million backlinks, would Google let me slide the way it does Seth's Blog, or has Google just decided to go after new and not well-established sites?
I personally think that you can't blame ebay, etc for those toxic links. Why do they want to get toxic links if they are big enough to get some quality? I guess that Google mainly give penalties to websites that are new, don't have a average daily/weekly amount of backlinks and have a high percentage of low quality backlinks that come in bulks.