| LED Digest 1916: The Linking Game |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Reg. from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam,led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com ............................................... January 6, 2005 Issue #1916 ............................................... .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Keeping the Harvesters at Bay ==-- ~ James Miller "I always encode the e-mail addresses on the site with Java." ~ Trevor Johnson "BestPrac.Org has a useful three-part series dealing with harvesters..." --== Problems for Linkers ==-- ~ Dirk Johnson "There is no evidence whatsoever that reciprocal links are being nullified." ~ Evan Lesser "Link popularity isn't what it used to be." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== Dropped by Google ==-- ~ Jenny Halasz ~ Dirk van der Werff --== Theft of Copywritten Material ==-- ~ Tom Aman ===== CONTINUING ================================= From: James Miller Subject: Harvesters > I have done as much as I possibly can to make it difficult > for visitors to harvest email addresses from the websites. > Short of making the member list available only to subscribers, > I'm looking for any other suggestions that might keep > harvesters at bay. - Marsha Kopan, LED 1914 I always encode the e-mail addresses on the site with Java. In fact in one of my programs which is an Editing Browser, I have code that can detect unencoded e-mail addresses and also code them so they are unrecognisable. It may not be 100% fool-proof, but my wife's site at www.celiamiller.com has not been spammed yet in a year and all e-mail addresses on the site are encoded this way. Another thing that is becoming increasingly possible, as e-mail servers are getting easier to use, is to recommend that the site has an e-mail such as This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it which forwards to This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it Then once it gets spammed, you change it! James Miller Daisy Analysis www.daisy.co.uk ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Trevor Johnson Subject: Harvesters The anti-spam organization BestPrac.Org has a useful three-part series dealing with harvesters and how to avoid them. You can find the series here: http://www.bestprac.org/articles/index.htm Trevor Johnson http://www.dietwords.com ------- new post - new topic -------- From: Dirk Johnson Subject: Linking > When folks ask to recip-link to me, they usually already > have about 50 outgoing links on the page they are putting > my information on. Is that harmful, or still beneficial? - Carrie MacKenzie, LED 1915 Fewer links are better, but in terms of your unique domain count, yes, a link like that is probably still to your advantage. Carrie, you are correct to limit your own link count on your own pages. It makes linking to you more attractive to others. As to other recent posts, many people enjoy the sport of disparaging the practice of reciprocal linking. To each their own, but to those who are trying to make informed decisions for their own sites, let's review some facts. I'll try to tone down the rhetoric. Reciprocal linking is an established Web marketing practice that pre-dates Google, and every other search engine. It actually goes to the very foundation of the Web. It's would be very complex for a search engine that uses linking as one of it's algorithmic factors to punish something that is so fundamentally established within to the medium. Google's founders decided to reward linking, of which reciprocation is a sub-set. It's just one of many ways for a site to earn links. Reciprocal linking should be done properly, and from my experience, it is usually is done that way, but that is not always the case. There are abusers. Much as with just about everything else. There are ways to limit the abuse among sites that do wish to reciprocate, such as using online forms for submission. I support that approach. I could complain that yellow pages ad rates or shopping mall rental rates are not fair to those who do not want to pay such high rates. But nobody will listen to me, and it would accomplish nothing. Yet there is a vocal camp that takes every opportunity to complain about reciprocal linking. They demand that Google and other search engines wise up. They call it unfair when their competitors can apply time and money to establish proper reciprocal links and then benefit. A reciprocal link is a private exchange between two willing parties. Search engines, as a third party, have decided to use the existence of that linking relationship in their own business. Google has done quite well with this approach, so changes on behalf of the naysayers may not be forthcoming. Of course, another search engine could emerge that would, as one of it's fundamental tenents, actively nullify reciprocal links, thus satisfying the disgruntled. We'll see if there is both market demand and the necessary capital to establish one. Maybe someone is trying. As of right now, any such efforts, either theoretical or even real, have negligible market implications of any consequence. Maybe that will change. There are currently search engines that use linking as less of a factor, yet Google enjoys a huge market advantage. Certainly the trend for Google has been to continue to reward the practice of relevant, honest reciprocal linking, not to punish it. There is no evidence whatsoever that reciprocal links are being nullified. Quite the opposite, in fact. This condition becomes obvious to anyone who takes the time to look closely at real search results for truly competitive search terms. While some continue to claim otherwise, it is quite likely that their conclusions are based on their own review of obscure terms within narrow niches. Those situations are not reflective of what is happening in larger, more mainstream realms, where raw linking popularity, from whatever source (not necessarily from, but including, link reciprocation), combined with deep content and proper page optimization, drives Google index results. Anyone can do this analysis for themselves, using whatever search terms they want to use. Reciprocal linking is one of a myriad of strategic marketing choices presented to an online business. Some will do it. Others will not. There are consequences for both decisions. Best regards, Dirk Johnson, Owner LinkStrategy.com http://www.linkstrategy.com djohnson, roiwebsites.com ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Evan Lesser Subject: Linking > Seems to me that this is a "false god" and that the SEs would be > better served, as would their customers, if they relied more on > content to evaluate sites than on links. William, Linking is only part of the picture. At this point, the search engines DO rely on content, as well as linking, and other things like keyword density, page structure, meta tags, etc., to come up with an over all "rank" for a website. Link popularity isn't what it used to be. In the past, it was mostly about the quantity of links pointing back to your website. These days, it is more about the quality and relevance of links. The thing to remember, is that like anything else in the world, linking can be done poorly, or well. The webmasters that go after links from quality websites that are directly related to their own, they can help themselves. Not only will the search engines take note, but the website's visitors as well. Quality websites linking to other related quality websites provides strong appeal for website visitors. Linking should be done with thought and intentional, calculated maneuvers - not haphazardly linking with any other website who will post a link. Regards, Evan Lesser LinksManager.com http://www.linksmanager.com ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Jenny Halasz Subject: Google > We run a very successful community based website in the UK... > For four years we have done very well in Google ranking... At the > start of Christmas Google dropped our domain name > www.ukvillages.co.uk all together. - Rupert Dick, LED 1915 Rupert, Google is unable to index your pages because at some point you added a 302 redirect from the main home pages of both the co.uk and the com site to http://www.ukvillages.co.uk/ukvillages/ukvillageshome.htm. A 302 redirect is temporary, and therefore the search engines don't usually follow it. The best thing to do is remove the redirect. If you can't do that, then at least change them to 301 (Permanent) redirects so that Google will follow them. Your site has some other opportunities for better ranking as well; you might want to hire a professional to help you. Best Regards, Jenny Halasz WebSourced/KeywordRanking www.keywordranking.com ------- new post - same topic ------- From: Dirk van der Werff Subject: Google Google is a law unto itself. My site disappeared out of the UK Google version completely for about a month. It is now re-indexed, but for important keywords like 'plants' it doesn't appear in the first 30 pages. In the global .com version it has been in the top 10 for more than 5 years for 'plants' - go figure. The content is updated all the time... and Google only answers with stock replies. There must be a reason, I can't work it out and I can't work wqith Google because they don't appear interested. I hope your site re-appears in one form or another, but don't bet on it being soon. many thanks Dirk van der Werff, Editor / Publisher Plants / Aquilegia Publishing http://www.plants-magazine.com/ ------- new post - new topic ------- From: Tom Aman Subject: Copy theft > ... just today I received notification of a new service > that searches for instances of copy theft from your site. > www.copyscape.com - Andrew Falkingbridge, LED 1914 Matching copy is not always bad - this service found links, described with copy from my site, that point back to my site. Some of these links I knew about, others were a complete surprise! Tom Aman http://www.cyberspyder.com
-------------------------------------------------------
The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks:
pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains
© Copyright 1995-2004 Adam Audette. All Rights Reserved.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"You cannot escape the responsibility of
tomorrow by evading it today." - Abraham Lincoln
|
