sounds bad for co-op

Static links... people whining about red rep... people saying that they got banned by Adsense and didn't do anything to deserve it... yeah, things are just the same as when you left

 

Static Links - sounds a little like link-vault. I think facilitating same as an option for co-opers will at least allow them to make up their own minds.. (for those of us who don't want assumtions made on their behalf ?)

I suspect a number of folk would like to consolidate their linking endeavours, rather than having to split between different providers. Some time ago mention was made of the possibility that new programs (like link-vault) might encounter capacity issues, such as down-time, intermittant service etc. I believe that's exctly what's been happening lately, they're (LV) outgrowing their meagre resources

DP has bucket loads of grunt - I think static links as an option would be great. To me it seems a logical progression.. irrespective of who gets penalized for what

Cheers,

JL

 

but it also means that all sites with Adsense will be penalized?

 

Adsense links aren't followed...they're in JS.

 

good to know i didn't miss much, except webjunkie being banned

 

Folks, everything google puts into its patents are not included in the algo.

 

Oh, and were you around when Buttman made his entrance?

That was fun

 

nope, missed that one too lol

 

so is shoemoney full of BS ?

 

Why is that. He is simply stating what he heard at the conference. Also read:

 

Geez, don't shoot the messenger . Why is Shoemoney constantly getting bashed when offering some sound advice and opinions?

 

what i don't understand is ...

someone makes a point about something like dynamic links are bad news ... the only arguments is "well that can't be right because the top 1% of all web sites would be screwed."

that is such a lame argument.

here we are trying to boost our affliates sites that no one would go without a little seo and many compare that to cnn.

apples and oranges

 

http://www.vbulletin.com/ has rotating outbound links on the homepage... I'm sure there are many other large sites too!

 

Agreed.

 

Well, it's the way people are wording it. Sites that are being linked to via a rotating backlink aren't being penalized, but that specific link is being devalued in the Google algo (or so the patents say). However, CNN and the like don't just remove the links since most stories have an archive or perm page which would likely include any and all links.

 

In my opinion.
Google has two main goals now.

First Comes >> Make more people buy adwords to get traffic and don't let people do SEO easily and get into better rankings.
Second comes >> Provide better results to web users.

 

Yes it is in the patent but who knows if it will be implemented. The last guy who spoke said specifically that this is what google wants publically displayed.

 

i agree with this statement. it's all about the money and what makes it flow better ... the highest priority now is keeping share holders happy ... and they are doing that.

 

It is also seems as though ststic links are sandboxed. I have had good bls in place since March 2005. I am not SEEING them at all using link: command. As far as rotating links I am NOT seeing any serious penalties either.

Shoemoney I think your choice of words is key here 'what google wants publically displayed'. So they want you to think that. Like many other Google secrets eg. PR internal and external are different. It just seems to me that Google is slowly trying to take SEO of of action .


PS I enjoy your post Shoemoney...pay no attention to those that criticize you, they just don't get the game .

 

maybe having links sandboxed is a good thing afterall ... sooner or later they will be to your benefit, as opposed to blinking links that *may* never be of benefit.

i wonder how much energy google is putting calculating this.