You come across some really weird SEO advice

Obviously, you didn't read the theory but decided to post anyway.

 

Oh i read it, it made me laugh and then i decided to post

There are so many reasons why this is wrong, unfortunately i don't have the time to post such a large list.

 

There's actually so many reasons why this is right, but you're entitled to your opinions.

 

Forgetting common sense, there are a huge number of correlations that can be made between ranking well and other activities. Given enough time, I could draw correlations between vodoo, the phase of the moon, the tides, or even tying your shoes to ranking well in Google.

Think about it: If Google based any ranking on links they saw in Gmail, their index would be open to manipulation by idiots with gmail accounts. I can write a program to spam all possible gmail accounts in a matter of minutes. If I then include my websites link in that email, I would be guaranteed to rank well. Or, if Obelia's suggestion were true, I could include my competitor's URL in the email and force his site to be less trustworthy because so many people would mark the message as spam.

What you have is the electronic equivalent of a voodoo doll. You beleive that by sticking "pins" with your URL in people gmail inbox, you can manipulate the way the world works. However, the reality is quite different. Just as coincidence occurs in voodoo to create beleivers, so to has some coincidence caused you to become a faithful adherent. It is unfortunate that many will no doubt read your theory and become converts because that will only serve to increase the amount of spam I get.

 

You made a lot of UNVALID points. First, of all, in my theory if you used SPAM techniques then you would devalue your website (or the links within the email), because email found within the SPAM vs. Inbox folder are being utilized to collect data and provide value/devalue of the links contained. Now can this be used to devalue an competitors website. "Yes" it potentially can, but does that stop Google from using it in their algorithm. There are many techniques which can be used today to devalue an competitors website in the SERP's', but Google still relies on its algorithm. Google will become concerned about the potential hurtings of competitors when an mass influx of sites experience such an threat. An elite site cannot be hurt by these results, such as Amazon.com, you cannot simply send 1 million spam messages to Gmail then include a link from Amazon.com then expect the site to crumble, that's absurd. Amazon.com is what I call an "bluechip" site and will hold its value regardless, how can 1 million SPAM messages hurt 1 billion positive backlinks? If that was the case then PayPal would be out of the SERPs, because I know everyone has a PayPal (phishing) SPAM with a image link or anchor/direct link to paypal.com.

Now certainly (using the above) if no-name-widget.com had 1,000 positive backlinks, but 100,000 SPAM messages, then the site would have an question mark and possibly be devalued by Google. Why wouldn't Google compare this data and weigh it in? It's obviously something wrong?

Lastly, the argument that Google wouldn't use such an concept because it opens doors for competitors to devalue each other sites is ridiculous to think Google would NOT have this written into its link value algorithm because of such a threat. I can devalue your site by using automatic tools to list your site on 100,000 link farm directories, but this doesn't stop Google from using this data, they still factor in the devalue vs. value. I can hurt your site in so many ways, opening numerous blog host accounts and using Blackhat SEO practices with your links (hiddent text, link farming, stuffed keywords/meta tags, redirects, etc.). Google still values this output, even if the amount of value is very small. If Google had to rewrite its algorithm to remove all evaluation of value which can be manipulated by an competitor or outside party, then Google would be out of business! Anyone can devalue another person's website in some shape or form, but this is not a mass practice and Google (as well as other SE's) do not hold all value in one element. If you could see a graph of all elements that Google takes into consideration when providing value to a site then I am certain Gmail would have a small piece of the pie. So, in my conclusion by simply focusing only on Gmail for PR or value would not do much, but all elements collectively would yield results. Definitely be aware of how you use Gmail and use it to your advantage, as well as all other elements (collectively).