Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Google Webmaster Help
Home
About this group
Join this group
Message from discussion Buying/selling links that pass PageRank
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
webado  
View profile  
 More options Dec 2 2007, 2:46 am
From: webado
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 23:46:23 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sun, Dec 2 2007 2:46 am
Subject: Re: Buying/selling links that pass PageRank
Print | View thread | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Kalena, there's no difference between a link that uses an image an
anchor and one that uses text as anchor. What matters is that there is
an html link and if it's paid, it would have either been opened as a
javascript pop up window (so it would not be crawled by robots because
they don't pop windows) or use rel="nofollow" to at least indicate to
robots (Google especially) that that link is not to be crawled (not to
pass PR). For that matter it's not much different from links with no
anchors at all (but these are even worse since they are strictly for
robots, humans can't click them).

As for the example given I find it is extremely to the point. Not only
is it not flimsy, it is astoundingly on target. It's actually rather
despicable to find such paid posts.  Those are false advertising and
false claims. Even worse than touting one's own horn actually. And
adding insult to injury the website thus promoted might even stand to
gain PR, unless those paid posts can be discarded. Which is exactly
what Google is trying to do. How else to drive the point home if not
with an example like that? An example where greedy commercialism gets
in the way of ethics?

On Dec 2, 1:14 am, Kal67 wrote:

> I think it's excellent that you are now doing your utmost to educate
> webmasters about the paid links issue in more public arenas than
> personal blogs and search marketing conferences. But I still have
> concerns and have two questions for you:

> 1) Do you expect webmasters who use regular advertising banners such
> as 125 x 125 ads on their sites (not text links) to add the
> rel=nofollow tag? Or worded another way, will you be penalizing sites
> who don't use nofollow on image ads? I've seen conflicting information
> about this and your guideline additions still don't make it clear.

> 2) I think the medical condition argument was very flimsy. If you
> start censoring sites using that argument, to me that signals that you
> assume people aren't smart enough to make up their own minds.
> Shouldn't buyer beware play a larger role here?

> thanks
> Kalena

> On Dec 2, 10:02 am, Maile Ohye wrote:

> > We wanted to start a thread for questions and comments regarding our
> > blog post on buying and selling links that pass PageRank.

> > As always, we appreciate the discussion.

> > Take care,
> > Maile, Matt, and the entire Webmaster Central Team- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google