Comments on: Paid Links: To Be Or Not To Be http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be - Positivity Possibilities Profits Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:29:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 By: YC http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-946 YC Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:00:10 +0000 http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-946 @ Rob - If Google wants to dictate rules in their game, all power to them. But that doesn't mean that outside their court, we have to play by the same rules. If I sell links on one of my sites, and they penalise THAT site within their search engine for not being within the laws of their game, then sure it is a choice I made. But if they penalise another site of mine that does not sell links, but by association it's mine, then it would be another story. Thankfully I doubt they'd be silly enough to do so. There're still many ways they can do to avoid handing out penalties, and if they're interested in reducing logistics and overhead, they should seriously look into those. @ SEMSpot - Thanks for commenting! The problem I see is that their measures do not solve the root cause of the issue - their coming up with a system like PR. Improve the algorithm, and you won't have to waste your own resources reviewing and using FUD to breed an environment not conducive to improvement. @ Chessnoid - Thanks! I think we know what is the best way to get around things - diversification. ;) @ Z - They are focusing on the fact that sites buy links to leverage on the PR of others, and many of these sites do not provide quality content, thus affecting their search engine result quality. To me, I'd say do something about your algorithm or ditch the PR system and find some better more productive way, instead of fining others in a way that basically does more harm for the whole community instead of good. @ Rob - If Google wants to dictate rules in their game, all power to them. But that doesn’t mean that outside their court, we have to play by the same rules. If I sell links on one of my sites, and they penalise THAT site within their search engine for not being within the laws of their game, then sure it is a choice I made. But if they penalise another site of mine that does not sell links, but by association it’s mine, then it would be another story. Thankfully I doubt they’d be silly enough to do so. There’re still many ways they can do to avoid handing out penalties, and if they’re interested in reducing logistics and overhead, they should seriously look into those.

@ SEMSpot - Thanks for commenting! The problem I see is that their measures do not solve the root cause of the issue - their coming up with a system like PR. Improve the algorithm, and you won’t have to waste your own resources reviewing and using FUD to breed an environment not conducive to improvement.

@ Chessnoid - Thanks! I think we know what is the best way to get around things - diversification. ;)

@ Z - They are focusing on the fact that sites buy links to leverage on the PR of others, and many of these sites do not provide quality content, thus affecting their search engine result quality. To me, I’d say do something about your algorithm or ditch the PR system and find some better more productive way, instead of fining others in a way that basically does more harm for the whole community instead of good.

]]> By: ZHereford http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-908 ZHereford Fri, 19 Oct 2007 02:15:52 +0000 http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-908 I find it odd that Google is so interfering in the case of link selling. If a site is good but can't get the exposure it deserves why not pay for the extra push? In the long run it helps everyone. The boys over at Google may need to re-think this one. Thanks YC! I find it odd that Google is so interfering in the case of link selling.
If a site is good but can’t get the exposure it deserves why not pay for the extra push? In the long run it helps everyone. The boys over at Google may need to re-think this one.
Thanks YC!

]]> By: CHESSNOID http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-905 CHESSNOID Fri, 19 Oct 2007 01:46:20 +0000 http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-905 Hi YC, Excellent post. I think you describe really well what many of us readers have been feeling. Most of us are no where near the size to qualify for a page rank but we all aspire to have one. I think you covered all the issues at hand and provide great insight on prioritizing the money making aspect of blogs. I agree with Rob in his observation. Sometimes a leader forgets its constituents. Cheers! Hi YC,
Excellent post. I think you describe really well what many of us readers have been feeling. Most of us are no where near the size to qualify for a page rank but we all aspire to have one. I think you covered all the issues at hand and provide great insight on prioritizing the money making aspect of blogs.

I agree with Rob in his observation. Sometimes a leader forgets its constituents.

Cheers!

]]> By: SEMSPot http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-904 SEMSPot Fri, 19 Oct 2007 01:29:13 +0000 http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-904 I believe paid links will be around for quite sometime. Yes Google might force some to go underground with there link selling operation and there will be new ways derived on how to hide a paid link on a page or site. In the end it is like what Rob mentioned above, the power company cannot tell us what appliances to use. However in the case with Google, since they are so big and to some sites a huge source of traffic they will still try and dictate what webmasters do in promoting of there site. I believe paid links will be around for quite sometime. Yes Google might force some to go underground with there link selling operation and there will be new ways derived on how to hide a paid link on a page or site. In the end it is like what Rob mentioned above, the power company cannot tell us what appliances to use. However in the case with Google, since they are so big and to some sites a huge source of traffic they will still try and dictate what webmasters do in promoting of there site.

]]> By: rob http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-899 rob Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:09:51 +0000 http://www.internetmarketingmind.com/internet-marketing/paid-links-to-be-or-not-to-be#comment-899 Reading this YC, you remind of something that we could all learn from. Be true to yourself and what feels right for you and your readers. Whilst Google likes to talk in terms of its index and the rules ascribed to being in it, it cannot deny that it has become like a world utility too. Would our electricity company tell us what appliances to use? Would it complain if we used the electricity to propel some energy saving device? Theres a massive irony in all this. Websites are the fuel of a search engine. Without that fuel they cannot burn. There was a time when they happy for all types of fuel. They didn't care so long as they could burn it and make a little profit on it. Then they got a little more selective and decided to concede that certain types of fuel (spam) were unwelcome as they couldn't burn them off without unwanted side effects. Recently they've upped that definition of pollutive fuels further with its whole paid links thing. Whatever next.... Reading this YC, you remind of something that we could all learn from. Be true to yourself and what feels right for you and your readers.

Whilst Google likes to talk in terms of its index and the rules ascribed to being in it, it cannot deny that it has become like a world utility too.

Would our electricity company tell us what appliances to use? Would it complain if we used the electricity to propel some energy saving device?

Theres a massive irony in all this. Websites are the fuel of a search engine. Without that fuel they cannot burn.

There was a time when they happy for all types of fuel. They didn’t care so long as they could burn it and make a little profit on it. Then they got a little more selective and decided to concede that certain types of fuel (spam) were unwelcome as they couldn’t burn them off without unwanted side effects. Recently they’ve upped that definition of pollutive fuels further with its whole paid links thing. Whatever next….

]]>