122 replies to this topic

[Ramona]

(Plearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ase note: I did do some searchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arches on the forum for "nofollow tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ag" before I entered this question, in archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>attempt to archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>avoid duplicarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ating archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>another discussion. I didn't find archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anything tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at seemed to reference this question, but I limited my searchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arching time to tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at term. If there's archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alrearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ady archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>another discussion here referencing my question, if whoever rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ading could just point me towarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ard tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at discussion archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and forgive the redundarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ancy, tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at would most kind. archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alt="smile.gif" /> )

Hi there, first post here, but I harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ave been trolling archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>about for some time now. I just rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad the following in archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a newsletter. archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>After rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ading the --URL::archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad8e0b9c56d08100cb5937938371b788-- --URL::9carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a720b9edc260472c2b44archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>af03082082-- [url=http://www.highrankings.com/forum/index.php?act=boardrules]Forum Rules[/url], I'm going to learchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ave the origin of the text "archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anonymous" archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>as I think tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at would better comply. But no, harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ave no archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>associarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ation with them.

(POST EDITED archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>AS PER JILL'S POST BELOW: No longer archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anonymous, my quoted text carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an be found here:
www.internetmarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arketingsecrets.com/ims70.html
Yes, I know it warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>as from archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a few months archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ago, but I warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>as rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ading some older newsletters I neglected until now archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and thought it warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>as (archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at learchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ast, archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>allegedly) still relevarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ant.)

OK, the following struck me archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>as odd, becarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ause it's different from wharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at my decidedly NON-expert self harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad before, but I do do archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a lot of rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ading on such:

"The other side of the nofollow tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ag, is tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at you carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ake archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>advarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>antarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age of it inside your own web sites. Think archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>about archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>all the low varchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alue, or no money parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages on your site... parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages like archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>about us, where to find us, contarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>act us. Every link learchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>aving your home parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age "bleeds" Parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ageRarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ank to those parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and you'll warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ant to stop tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at!

Instearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad of using normarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>al starchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>atic hyperlinks you carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an use nofollow links instearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad. This lets the "humarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an mouse clicking visitor" find the parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages on their own, but totarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ally blocks the searchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arch engine from finding them.

So not only carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an you provide visitors with archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a rich user experience, you carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an conserve your Parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ageRarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ank archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and link popularchlite'>archlite'>arity within your home parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age.

So why is tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a good thing? You carchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an archlite'>archlite'>aim your PR archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and link popularchlite'>archlite'>arity archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at your importarchlite'>archlite'>ant money marchlite'>archlite'>aking product parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages... The ones YOU choose!"

OK, so in carchlite'>archlite'>ase it warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>asn't archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alrearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ady obvious, this individuarchlite'>archlite'>al is tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alking archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>about entire Parchlite'>archlite'>AGES on your site. I understarchlite'>archlite'>and tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at unscrupulous link excharchlite'>archlite'>angers might try to insert "nofollow" instructions in their metarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>atarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ags on parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages fearchlite'>archlite'>aturing their archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>agreed upon outgoing links to try to marchlite'>archlite'>ake the link excharchlite'>archlite'>ange look one-warchlite'>archlite'>ay. I think tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at's reprehensible if you archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>agreed to excharchlite'>archlite'>ange links, but tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at's archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>another story. This archlite'>archlite'>author seems to be sarchlite'>archlite'>aying tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at the parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages on your own site (tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at do NOT necessarchlite'>archlite'>arily contarchlite'>archlite'>ain outgoing links to other sites) you might still warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ant to instruct archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>as "nofollow."

Is tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at true? I'd just never hearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ard archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anything of this narchlite'>ature before. I've never used the "nofollow" tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ag for archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anything. If I didn't warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ant it publicly archlite'>accessible, I wouldn't put it on archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a publicly archlite'>accessible parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age/parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age clickarchlite'>able from the index parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age, is my thinking thus farchlite'>ar. I doubt marchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>any engine searchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archers find our "contarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>act us" parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and land on tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at DIRECTLY from archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an engine, but I figured it they did somehow . . . so wharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at? But I do harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ave parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages on archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a couple of sites tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at I could "nofollow" if it meant archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anything archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>all, "contarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>act us" parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and the like, with little or no other content on them, if by doing just tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at simple thing it might archlite'>actuarchlite'>archlite'>ally boost the "findability" of the index or other parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ages I do warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ant to get seen.

Opinions, archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anyone? archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alt="thinking.gif" />

Edited by qwerty, 21 September 2005 - 11:43 PM.

[Scottie]

My personarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>al, unscientific-archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and-not-tested belief is tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at --URL::archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ae47d2926f665b51dcfcd3d9264813d7-- nofollow tells the searchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arch engines you don't monitor the content on tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age.

Marchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>aybe so, marchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>aybe not. I wouldn't use the tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ag, I'd just clearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an up the links I didn't warchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ant to harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ave on my site. If you use them to "hide" links, I think it will come barchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ack to bite you in the rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ar- kind of like yelling, "Hey Google, I'm going to pull archlite'>archlite'>a farchlite'>archlite'>ast one on you. LOOK archlite'>archlite'>AT THIS Parchlite'>archlite'>AGE!"

If I worked for archlite'>archlite'>a searchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arch engine, I think I would be very interested in researchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arching wharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at people used "nofollow" tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ags for.

Welcome to the forum, Ramona!

[Jill]

Welcome Ramona!

Actually, our --URL::fd6dec46ac915cccd2be700b7915234c-- --URL::f6d255d09ceaeb4e9598e4f6ebfdc3f3-- Forum Rules state that we must attribute any content that you paste from another site or message. So please add that to your original post if you would.

What the person is talking about, sounds like it would be better served by robots.txt which is specifically for that purpose.

[Ramona]

Tharchlite'>anks for your feedbarchlite'>ack, Scottie archlite'>and Jill. archlite'>alt="smile.gif" />

Sorry archlite'>about the misunderstarchlite'>anding, I did modify my originarchlite'>al text archlite'>as per your instruction.

archlite'>ain'>Wharchlite'>at the person is tarchlite'>alking archlite'>about, sounds like it would be better served by robots.txt which is specificarchlite'>ally for tharchlite'>at purpose.

archlite'>align="right">archlite'>ack.png' archlite'>alt='View Post' />

Weeelll . . . tharchlite'>at's certarchlite'>ainly wharchlite'>at *I* would do, rarchlite'>ather tharchlite'>an designing parchlite'>ages, linking them from my index parchlite'>age, then inserting archlite'>a tarchlite'>ag to archlite'>attempt to keep them "secret." Or, I just wouldn't link them from other parchlite'>ages linked from the index or other linked parchlite'>ages archlite'>at archlite'>all. But I warchlite'>as more specificarchlite'>ally wondering if there were Parchlite'>ageRarchlite'>ank/"findarchlite'>ability" benefits archlite'>above archlite'>and beyond tharchlite'>at. I harchlite'>ave parchlite'>ages with less archlite'>attrarchlite'>active content to archlite'>an initiarchlite'>al surfer of the site (archlite'>agarchlite'>ain, "contarchlite'>act us" archlite'>and the like) tharchlite'>at I wouldn't carchlite'>are archlite'>about being in archlite'>any search engine's index. But, I never thought to EXCLUDE them from archlite'>any index either. This site/person seems to be saying perhaps I should, for Parchlite'>ageRarchlite'>ank reasons.

archlite'>alt="unsure.gif" />

[Ramona]

Oh . . heck, I think I may have violated another rule by posting a link. I guess I should have attributed the quoted text without including the URL? But would that be enough attribution to get to the quoted text for any needed verification?

I'm just not sure. Again, apologies. If what I've done is against forum guidelines, maybe someone could just edit my post or post again here with exactly how I should attribute the quoted text.

Thanks.

[qwerty]

Piece of cake, Ramona. You can post a URL without having the forum turn it into a link by just skipping the http:// bit. I'll go edit your post.

And welcome to HR, by the way

[Ramona]

Tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anks, qwerty. Sorry to be such archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a dolt archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and require your time viarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a . . . my doltishness. Tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anks for your parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>atience archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and good humor.

I followed the threarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ad Scottie posted archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>above. It still seems like there's archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a good bit of confusion regarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>arding this issue. I'd still very much welcome archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>any comments on my originarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>al question . . . but unless someone here posts something extrarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a-compelling . . . I think I'm going to ignore the archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>advice in the text I quoted archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>above archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and just continue with mine own personarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>al prarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>actice of never using the nofollow tarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ag.

Agarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ain, suggestions archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and/or archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>additionarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>al elucidarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ations welcome, but . . . it just rearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ally seems logicarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ally, prarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>acticarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ally, archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and philosophicarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ally ODD (imho) to harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ave archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anything archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>at archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>all linked from your index or archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>another public parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and THEN try to tell archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a searchlite'>archlite'>arch engine to "not go there." Scottie's comment tharchlite'>archlite'>at it might be archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a "flarchlite'>archlite'>ag" of some sort is probarchlite'>archlite'>ably quite archlite'>archlite'>apt, but even if not, it's still just too much of archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a snarchlite'>archlite'>afu for me. If it's not "public" content, for archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a searchlite'>archlite'>archer or archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an engine or wharchlite'>archlite'>atever, then don't link it on archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>an earchlite'>asily found or archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>alrearchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ady publicized parchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>age archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and give it no security/parchlite'>assword. If it IS public content, then archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anyone/archlite'>anything including archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a searchlite'>archlite'>arch engine should be archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>able to willfully archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and without archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>any restrarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>aint . . . go there.

I'm harchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>aving archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>a hard time wrapping my brarchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>ain around archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anything else . . . which was why I found the text I quoted odd, archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>and why I wanted to ask archlite'>archlite'>archlite'>about it here. Tharchlite'>archlite'>archlite'>anks!

[qwerty]

archlite'>Another thing to consider is tharchlite'>at archlite'>all this tarchlite'>alk of PR learchlite'>akarchlite'>age is just silly, for the most parchlite'>art. It is true tharchlite'>at if archlite'>a parchlite'>age links to five parchlite'>ages, it's sending more PR to earchlite'>ach of them tharchlite'>an it would if it warchlite'>as linking to six parchlite'>ages, but who carchlite'>ares? PR is nowhere near as important as archlite'>a lot of people make it out to be, and the difference is negligible.

The trick is tharchlite'>at there's no trick. Link to parchlite'>ages in archlite'>a way tharchlite'>at makes it easy for people to find the information they archlite'>need.

[Jill]

This site/person seems to be saying perhaps I should, for PageRank reasons.

No offense to the original writer, but that's just plain dumb, in my opinion.

[Scottie]

Oh heck, go on and offend the original writer and maybe they'll stop sharing their "secrets" and confusing people. How can we be more offensive, do you think?

[Jill]

Oh heck, go on and offend the original writer and maybe they'll stop sharing their "secrets" and confusing people.

oooooh! --URL::01c33bbea80b5ef21be73d78a2df3e58-- Springer Forum Marketing at its best?

[Michael Martinez]

People who tarchlite'>archlite'>alk archlite'>archlite'>about "bleeding Parchlite'>archlite'>ageRarchlite'>archlite'>ank" don't know wharchlite'>archlite'>at they archlite'>archlite'>are tarchlite'>archlite'>alking archlite'>archlite'>about, but even archlite'>archlite'>among tharchlite'>archlite'>at crowd, most of them archlite'>archlite'>agree tharchlite'>archlite'>at you would Warchlite'>archlite'>ANT to use your internarchlite'>archlite'>al linkarchlite'>archlite'>age to puff up your Parchlite'>archlite'>ageRarchlite'>archlite'>ank.

So, archlite'>archlite'>anyone who archlite'>archlite'>advises you to use REL=NOFOLLOW on your internarchlite'>archlite'>al linkarchlite'>archlite'>age REarchlite'>archlite'>ALLY doesn't know wharchlite'>archlite'>at they archlite'>archlite'>are tarchlite'>archlite'>alking archlite'>archlite'>about.

The archlite'>archlite'>author of tharchlite'>archlite'>at newsletter is misinforming his rearchlite'>archlite'>aders, archlite'>archlite'>and it's archlite'>archlite'>advice you carchlite'>archlite'>an sarchlite'>archlite'>afely disregarchlite'>archlite'>ard.

You carchlite'>archlite'>annot "bleed" Parchlite'>archlite'>ageRarchlite'>archlite'>ank. archlite'>archlite'>And you certarchlite'>archlite'>ainly only hurt yourself by telling searchlite'>arch engines tharchlite'>archlite'>at you harchlite'>ave unimportarchlite'>ant parchlite'>ages by using REL=NOFOLLOW when linking to your own parchlite'>ages. You might archlite'>as well starchlite'>amp them archlite'>as "SParchlite'>AMMY, CRUMBY, archlite'>AND NOT WORTH INDEXING" becarchlite'>ause tharchlite'>archlite'>at is wharchlite'>archlite'>at you archlite'>archlite'>are telling the searchlite'>arch engines who honor REL=NOFOLLOW.

[bkernst]

The only real use for NOFOLLOW (and NOINDEX) is using it on pages that are purely login pages, which you would not want to have indexed purely for security reasons. Other than that you would want to have every page indexed.

The PageRank bleeding is nonsense. As already stated, you want to use your PageRank from any of your pages to help with the PageRank of other pages and external links to related sites that link back to you. I have done this to get the rankings of my own site up, by linking to a client, and the client has linked back to my site. The result was that the rankings for both sites improved.

[Robert813]

Hi Everyone,
I'm new to not only this boarchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>rd but archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>lso to e-commerce archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd SEO. My darchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>y job is VP of Operarchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>tions for high-speed Internet archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd sarchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>tellite tv comparchlite'>any I'm developing archlite'>a line of e-commerce stores archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd harchlite'>ave been diligently studying SEO for archlite'>about 1 1/2 years. I humbly admit that I am not the "practiced" experts that many of you are. It can be very confusing at times with archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>ll the different archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd conflicting info out there.

I do use Optilink archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd I harchlite'>ave read "Dynamic Linking" from the creator of Optilink archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd it sounds like it makes sense to me to use the NOFOLLOW tag. What he says is that archlite'>a page does not "bleed" PR but it passes its PR on. The page that contains the link does not "give up" archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>n PR but what it gives is archlite'>a "vote" based on its own PR archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd how many pages it "votes for " using links. So if archlite'>a page "votes' for only 3 pages rarchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>ther than 4, the PR of the home page distrubutes its PR in archlite'>a more concentrarchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>ted manner.

Since getting archlite'>a top Google position rely's heavily on page reputation archlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>nd PR it only makes sense to control the PR of inside pages if we can.

Google itself endorses this look at item #14 here www.google.com/webmasters/bot.html#whatlinks

url delinked as per --URL::62ca550042b59b3384e5f1bd38fbe74e-- --URL::6120b707b44ab32bb46cb3968f9f70e0-- [url=http://www.highrankings.com/forum/index.php?act=boarchlite'>an class='searchlite'>aarchlite'>an>rdrules]Forum Rules[/url]

Edited by robwatts, 25 September 2005 - 06:04 AM.

[sonnyyu]

Google itself uses this look archlite'>at www.google.com/hurricarchlite'>ane.html, search source code rel=nofollow".

My $0.02