Hi folks, I'm still working on my new site, it is actually up and running, well, proably more correct to say that it is up and stumbling, but never mind, I battle on. I have heard/read that if you link to a site and they link back to you it is cancelled out by google's crawlers ie they don't count it at as a brownie point when assessing your site as any two people could simply add links for each other's site. This seems strange to me - I can't see why google would discount the links if they are reciprocal. Have I got my facts wrong? If not, why won't google 'count' them. bijoupad

Google might discount obvious reciprocal linking if there was no good reason, eg like all the SPAMs inviting me to set up such links with entirely irrelevant and sometimes content-thin but heavily-commercial sites.

If the linking is useful between useful related sites it should count as a positive for both.

Rgds

Damon

related remains the most important key word here.

Google says nothing about discounting value
The only talk about linking value, seo recommends your links be one way whenever possible simply because it makes sense.

Just focus on getting good links slowly and you'll be fine.

I agree that quality linkage is a positive. If the links to another site are relevant to the content, and to a site of at least equal quality then I don't see why Google would frown on this. The problem comes when it's gratuitous links to a page for no other reason than trying to get up the search engine rankings. Google do discourage link farming etc. but quality user content (that includes relevant links) they do encourage. I would honestly concentrate on quality of the content and not worry too much about the seo.

Quote:

If the linking is useful between useful related sites it should count as a positive for both

Agree fully. Funnily enough, I've only added three links in 10 years.

I have a theory that G only counts the links that are actually used.
I don't know if this is possible, but I'm sure this is what Google would chose to do if it is achievable.

They are trying to reflect what is actually useful/used by the punters.

I really question how relative it is these days. I don't think a day goes by where I don't get some sort of 3-way link request. The site they want a link from is normally loosely related to one of the links - but ultimately ends up with some sort of gaming/porn site. It makes it all rather farcical, I just bin them automatically these days. I add a link - only if I see it is relevant to the site. I never have got into emailing to get back-links, although I'm not saying this is such a bad thing - just not really sure these days. Seems like a lot of work for questionable return.

I get at least one or more link requests a week.

Mostly BS and always nothing to do with my site's content. Mostly they are time wasting idiot "directories".

Some are very creative, people who have actually read my sites actually ask for links.

The universal answer is always "indifference".

Sometimes, a fellow from my genre, asks for a link even to good sites.

As I said before, I've given three links in ten years

Oops, one small difference, I have for periods up to three months made links to very personal friends [read people like here] solely to get them into Google and then removed the link later when they stood on their own feet.

In OZ terms that's called loyalty to your mates, not all will understand.

I'm with Ian on the "loyalty to mates" issue.

But apart from that, I would only add links from my site if I though they would genuinely add value to the site - i.e. the links would need to be relevant and useful for my target audience.

I would expect links to my site to be placed on other sites accordingly. I may contact a site owner to let them know about my site if, and only if, I thought it would be of interest and use to them.

I believe "link swaps" to be a complete and utter waste of time.

I also get loads of emails for link exchanges - never added one. My main reason to link to other sites is usually to provide the source for quotes I've used, or to corroborate facts. I've never asked for a link in return.

I completely agree with Pengi, and I used to explain this patiently to people who contacted me asking for link exchanges.

I will say that the number of laughingly off-topic link exchange requests I get has declined. Now they then to be at least arguably related to the topic of my site.

If I get a request that's at all plausible and interesting for me readers then I send a slightly-off-beam reply and question as a Turing Test. If a real, intelligent, pleasant human answers then I'll consider a link, though still rarely a swap (ie I won't then ask for a link back).

If the whole things seems robotic, them f**k them, since I put care and personal attention into my hand-crafted sites and I'm not there to be walked over by some get-rich-quick scumbag...

Rgds

Damon



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2010 07:56AM by DamonHD.

Not a single link swap on my site. If I link out it's either because I think it's complementary for the user or it's paid for (and still must be complementary).

Right folks, thanks for all that useful information. So relevant links only, and don't sweat about expecting a return link. Yep... got that. Head down again - me against Dreamweaver - cheers,dianne

Quote:

me against Dreamweaver

Rots of ruck

I'm stricly a "do it manually" with a good text editor.

I use NoteTab Pro but there's still a free version around.