1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Using the new rel="nofollow" attribute

Discussion in 'Co-op Advertising Network' started by glengara, Jan 19, 2005.

  1. #1
    Would save the network from being seen simply as a links scheme.

    Should it be adopted?
     
    glengara, Jan 19, 2005 IP
    Bernard likes this.
  2. l234244

    l234244 Peon

    Messages:
    1,225
    Likes Received:
    50
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Not sure how sites can be validated if the links can not be spidered?
     
    l234244, Jan 19, 2005 IP
  3. vagrant

    vagrant Peon

    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    181
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    would that not defeat the object of having the links if the search engines ignored them ?
     
    vagrant, Jan 19, 2005 IP
  4. mopacfan

    mopacfan Peon

    Messages:
    3,276
    Likes Received:
    164
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    Exactly. That's the whole point of the network.

    What are you smokin?
     
    mopacfan, Jan 19, 2005 IP
    ResaleBroker likes this.
  5. Refrozen

    Refrozen Peon

    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    Exactly, who'd actually use the Co-Op for anything other than IBLs?
     
    Refrozen, Jan 19, 2005 IP
  6. selfstyledexpert

    selfstyledexpert Peon

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    "It's a trap!" -- Admiral Akbar

    I know lots of members who use the Co-op Ad Network because it's a steady stream of traffic and visitors for their sites. Don't you have something better to do, Glengara?
     
    selfstyledexpert, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  7. selfstyledexpert

    selfstyledexpert Peon

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    for those of you who don't spend your nights reading every SEO blog this is some sort of sissyfight that a few message board heroes are trying to start with the Co-op Ad Network.

    Look, you're famous!

    http://www.seobook.com/archives/000633.shtml
     
    selfstyledexpert, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  8. rustybrick

    rustybrick User ID 3

    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    41
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    158
    #8
    Earning respect in such a community requires a lot of due diligence.
     
    rustybrick, Jan 20, 2005 IP
    digitalpoint likes this.
  9. digitalpoint

    digitalpoint Overlord of no one Staff

    Messages:
    36,443
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Best Answers:
    400
    Trophy Points:
    710
    Digital Goods:
    26
    #9
    The ad network has been rapidly evolving/maturing, and will continue to do so. The rel="nofollow" stuff will certainly be looked at (like many other things), as it does serve some useful purposes on it's own.

    But using it because someone incorrectly sees something as a "link scheme" is certainly would not be the right reason to use it though. Someone could also argue that links in a forum post or signatures are also link schemes. Doesn't mean I agree with them, nor does it mean that I think all links should use it.

    In some minor cases, I could see how it has some advantages within a forum. And it may have some advantages to the ad network as well (I'm just not sure what those advantages are exactly at this point).
     
    digitalpoint, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  10. Blogmaster

    Blogmaster Blood Type Dating Affiliate Manager

    Messages:
    25,859
    Likes Received:
    1,346
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    380
    #10
    Agree 100%. However Google is starting to wheat out importance of links when the content of postings has nothing to do with the content of the sites you are linking to.
     
    Blogmaster, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  11. selfstyledexpert

    selfstyledexpert Peon

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #11
    what strikes me as strange about the whole thing is this mad rush to connect your ad exchange network to scheming Google. To my mind, Google would prefer that webmasters dont think of Google when working on their own pages. Everything I've read about your network indicates that this is exactly what you did. But, now you have people hiding in the shrubbery, leaping out, yelling "Ah-ha!" and posting shirty entries to SEO blogs.
     
    selfstyledexpert, Jan 20, 2005 IP
    ViciousSummer likes this.
  12. miko67

    miko67 Peon

    Messages:
    769
    Likes Received:
    59
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #12
    no offense sitetutor, but are you sure? I mean do you have any facts to support that claim?

    I don't know at all, but I think it sounds a little.... This would mean that blogging about your favorite keyword-anchor-link-to-website would be getting increased importance... Man, I better start writing content to my blog :)
     
    miko67, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  13. Bernard

    Bernard Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,592
    Likes Received:
    106
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #13
    The purported purpose for the rel="nofollow" attribute is for webmasters to indicate links published on their sites that are not expressly reviewed/approved. This comes in handy for sites that are publishing content from 3rd parties such as blog comments, forum posts & signatures, guestbook entries, etc.

    Are webmasters participating in the co-op network expressly approving every link being published on their pages? IMO, the use of the attribute would be warranted if a webmaster could not maintain 100% review/acceptance of the sites that might be rendered on their pages. OTOH, if a webmaster implicitly trusts the gatekeepers of the program to maintain standards, not using the attribute should be OK as defined by Google, Yahoo & MSN (at least as described by DS).

    It is not hard to imagine that the big 3 SEs might start tightening up the penalties for linking to bad neighborhoods now that they have given webmasters the tools to protect themselves from 3rd party content.
     
    Bernard, Jan 20, 2005 IP
    digitalpoint likes this.
  14. rtheodorow

    rtheodorow Peon

    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    So maybe a category option for the coop would be a good idea if G does that......
     
    rtheodorow, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  15. digitalpoint

    digitalpoint Overlord of no one Staff

    Messages:
    36,443
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Best Answers:
    400
    Trophy Points:
    710
    Digital Goods:
    26
    #15
    There already are categories for new ads (and languages). The data is being collected, but not yet being put to use (although it will be). The ad network needs to get to be a certain size before breaking it apart into the themes would work (mostly to do with enough ads for each theme).
     
    digitalpoint, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  16. selfstyledexpert

    selfstyledexpert Peon

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #16
    Webmasters don't need to protect Themselves from 3rd party content. Seems to me, webmasters are being drafted to do the search engines job and separate out relevant from non-relevant content. That's not really a webmaster's responsibility. I don't particularly wish to become a Theme Nazi. This won't improve the quality of the web one bit.

    If Google wasn't an exceptionally powerful commercial force on the Web, nobody would take rel="nofollow" seriously. But, if Google wasn't a powerful commercial force, there would still be a Co-op Advertising Network.
     
    selfstyledexpert, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  17. Bernard

    Bernard Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,592
    Likes Received:
    106
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #17
    SSE, that not the purpose for the attribute. Also, the attribute is being adopted by Yahoo & MSN. This is not a pure Google issue.

    It is intended to protect publishers from 3rd party, unapproved content posted to their sites. It has nothing to do with themes or relevance.
     
    Bernard, Jan 20, 2005 IP
    ResaleBroker likes this.
  18. Blogmaster

    Blogmaster Blood Type Dating Affiliate Manager

    Messages:
    25,859
    Likes Received:
    1,346
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    380
    #18
    It seperates self advertisers from real recommendations.
     
    Blogmaster, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  19. selfstyledexpert

    selfstyledexpert Peon

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    Don't those publishers already have methods to control this content?

    Doesn't it force some publishers now to take affirmative steps to OK 3rd party content they like?

    It's a Google issue because they're the ones who have made linking issues like this of foremost importance. They have an algorithm you can scam with links, and now everybody has to dance to their tune.
     
    selfstyledexpert, Jan 20, 2005 IP
  20. nevetS

    nevetS Evolving Dragon

    Messages:
    2,544
    Likes Received:
    211
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #20
    I agree. Google's idea of ranking sites based on inbound links is just that - their idea. There's no reason for the rest of the world to jump just because they found a flaw in their own logic. People will game the search engines no matter what the rules are. If it turns out that link popularity is an idea that is past it's time, the world will evolve. There was a time not too many years ago that a Yahoo directory listing was the most important thing you could do to market a site. Yahoo had to change, and Google will eventually have to change too. If you asked on this board, there would be a hundred different ideas that people would come up with to bring meaningful search engine listings to the top of the SERPs and spam to the bottom. I would hope that Google is already researching these things. One more attribute on every a tag is just silly. There is an easier way that has less of an effect on the internet community's way of doing things and eventually it will bring itself forward.
     
    nevetS, Jan 20, 2005 IP
    digitalpoint likes this.