Marketing Pilgrim - Latest Comments in Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Fıratpen — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:46:33 -0000

Thanks you gülüm

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Cheryline Lawson — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 10:23:15 -0000

I refuse to buy links. I use a method that helps me to get free organic listings and that is enough for me.

Cheryline Lawson's last blog post..Yeast Infection Ebook Reviews

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

msn — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:06:27 -0000

Oh, and Chris… by far, the more common penalty applied in the case of linking schemes is for the link seller to have their ability to pass PageRank stripped away. We’re aware of and very strongly tuned against facilitating the “Googlebowling” you’ve expressed concerns about… and, in fact, I’ve never seen an example of that in the wild.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Oyunlar — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:30:26 -0000

THANKS...

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

yeast infection symptoms — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:52:01 -0000

I think google is right as it clearly mentioned in their policy that if you are placing any ad in your site/blog it should not be dofollow. Google dont like passing PR to some site and taking money. google will not object if you are passing the traffic anyways.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Michael Woo — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:34:59 -0000

Ah, they have a huge clampdown on link sellers, I'm hit pretty bad.. really bad..

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Andy Beal — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:32:29 -0000

@Ashish - yep!

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Ashish K Arora — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:29:32 -0000

Hi Andy,
how would google know if someone buying links from the similiar type of domains. The links would look like one way link and google always respect one way links. google can come to know only in one case, if sites are selling lots of links and this would look suspicious.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

SEO — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 07:04:50 -0000

As you mention, there’s a world of difference between comment spam and paid links. But, there has to be some way for the search engines to not let whomever can afford the most links to dominate the rankings.

David
Seo service

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

future gadgets — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:24:41 -0000

this post reminds me of a webmaster that has PR8 website and suddenly dropped the traffic because google no longer index his website. The reason...because he's selling links

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Jason Falk — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 03:34:04 -0000

I sure wish it didn't exist, it seems the Internet is getting strangled with these unnecessary restraints.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Aussie Mum, Bree — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 21:34:12 -0000

Cheers for the reply Andy. I do have a "Buy Advertising" link in the right side panel which I planned on selling text links so in this case it would be better to use the nofollow attribute according to what you have just said? I didn't really want to do this as it prevents my advertisers from getting there pr/traffic allocation which they so rightfully deserve, I mean they are paying for it right! So how should I navigate this problem? Only have a selected area to allow advertising?

Thanks for your suggestions.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Andy Beal — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 21:26:46 -0000

@Bree - If you plan on linking to sites that have nothing to do with your site, or you've made it obvious that the links are part of a directory, or it's clear that the links are there only because they paid, then you might want to consider using the nofollow. If the links are relevant - even if they are paid - I wouldn't bother.

Google won't likely punish your site for not using nofollow, but it could in theory prevent your links from passing PageRank.

I hope that helps.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Aussie Mum, Bree — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 21:19:27 -0000

Thanks for the info, my question would be (sorry if already asked) does google "punish" sites that don't use the nofollow attribute? I am still divided as to use the nofollow or not but I will do more research and look into this further, thanks again for the post Andy, appreciated ;)

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

igor berger — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:54:20 -0000

As you probably have already realized I do not use or believe in nofollow! So I make sure I link to clean Websites! I use to think same as Dockarl, about respecting the developers and leaving their link on the bottom of their work.

Until I did a neighborhood link check on phpBB. I found out they link to many sub industry Websites...
I do not want to put those word on this board.

So because I was linked to phpBB my forum was infested with sub industry Spam.

phpBB disclaimer states you can remove the copyright but please leave the link or you may not be able to get product support.

Well I never got product support from them and I have removed their bad neighborhood link.
I want to follow Google Webmaster Guideliness of not linking to bad Websites.

I have written many mods to fix the phpBB plague that has infected my forum. All of this I am doing with an intent to provide the same service to other forum and blog users via project PHSDL that I have started.

So let's all stand up and support not using nofollow.

Thank you,
Igor

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

igor berger — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:38:01 -0000

Sorry guy that you may not agree with me and with the top two heads here it is kind of hard to voice an opinion, but I believe if you can crwal it you can roll it.
So if you have bad links on your Website putting a nofollow to protect yourself will just not cut it!

Igor

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Jamey Wood — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 12:24:45 -0000

Andy asked (in comment #25) "Jamey - why would I change the post?" I see that you've now added an update with a link to Adam's additional comments. That covers what I was suggesting. Also, it's interesting to hear your take that his original intent clearly was that "He wished it didnâ€™t exist" (and may now be engaging in some damage control spin).

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Aaron Pratt — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 23:13:59 -0000

It's interesting to read Andy's post then Adam's clarification. I find a lot of, "Google said it's ok to sell links and do paid posts" out here when it is far from the truth. Could it be a wish? It's getting a little repetitive and yes, boring, sorry.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Dockarl — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 07:35:53 -0000

What is so wrong with people buying links? (Frank Grasso) - I think that Google, and the internet as a whole, are trying to maintain a 'fairness' whereby people with good ideas have an equal chance of having them found because they are good ideas - rather than being hand fed with ideas that are commercially driven (ie through increasing page rank through bought links etc).

Yes it is frustrating sometimes building traffic 0 but believe me, I know from experience, traffic turns from a trickle to a torrent very quickly if you have interesting things to say or products - purely because people like linking to them.

I've written a bit about my thoughts on nofollow recently (I hope these links are nofollowed as it's not my intention to comment spam :) but - here is one http://www.utheguru.com/rel... ).

I've also found a person with great ideas about the implementation of nofollow - JLH, a regular on the google webmaster tools forum talks about his policy here - http://www.jlh-design.com/n...

I agree with just about everything he says there other than no-following links from developers (for example, the 'powered by wordpress' at the bottom of wordpress blogs), as I believe the fact that someone uses an open source product should be a clear 'vote' for the designers of that product.

Cheers and great topic mate! Wish I was able to make it there - sounds like it was an interesting conference.

Cheers,

Dockarl (Matthew James, Brisbane)

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

AndyBeard — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 05:21:46 -0000

Adam clarified what he intended to say..

I don't think Adam clarified the nofollow usage situation which still seems to be penalizing the little guys who wish to monetize their content without being deceptive to their readers or introducing links that are off-topic.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Joe Duck — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 02:48:01 -0000

Excellent post Andy, and thanks to Adam for the clarifying comments.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Andy Beal — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 01:08:05 -0000

Jamey - why would I change the post? Adam said that he wished nofollow didn't exist. I appreciate him adding his additional views, but it was quite clear the context of his statement, when we chatted. He wished it didn't exist.

I've been on the company side of PR before. Sometimes you say something that you later regret, and a good move is always to try and clarify a statement. Maybe Adam didn't mean the context he originally conveyed, or maybe he's doing some damage control. I'm sure the Yahoo guy who criticized Google's usability wished he could go back and change what he said. Unfortunately, when you chat to the media, you have to be crystal clear about what you say. Ask Eric Schmidt, he's made some pretty wild statements to me (and the press) and later retracted in the same conversation.

I have a lot of respect for Adam - he's very open and honest - but I don't think my post misrepresents his comment.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Jason Schramm — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:38:54 -0000

It's nice to see Google making the rounds to clear up confusion. My main problem with nofollow has been applications like Wordpress that enable it by default without any simple way to disable it unless you look for a plugin. It's the implementation by third-parties that makes it potentially harmful.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Tyler Banfield — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:27:32 -0000

Nofollow is such a headache. As several people have said, I think the Big G is kind of abusing its original purpose by constantly saying that it should be used to fight spam AND flag paid links.

Re: Google’s Lasnik Wishes "NoFollow Didn’t Exist"

Jamey Wood — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:21:40 -0000

Just my opinion, but it might be worth updating your post based on Adam's clarification. My first thought after reading it was: wonder if he was saying he think NoFollow should go away or just that he wishes that there weren't so much manipulative intent out there which makes it necessary.

Also just my opinion... I think we need more NoFollow-style controls, not less.