GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - SE Traffic

WiredGuy · 09-24-2003, 04:17 PM

You're correct, most people are looking for PR trades within the same point blocks compared to Google's Toolbar PR ranking. While that's great for spidering effect (different C blocks as well), most webmasters will stay within the same block range using that method unless they're scaling their operation to a large number of websites.

Your proposed method is the way of the future in my opinion, Google's already doing content clustering and is starting to experiment with Geo-specific results now as well and it's my guess that they'll be able to determine relevant and irrelevant links within the next few months. Furthermore, I am getting the impression that the number of sites per IP (or per C block class for that matter) will not be penalized in future (or the penalty reduced) based on the ideas you put forth.

Also, your point number 3 on your suggested link structures is a pretty good representation so long as the links are relevant to each other. Essentially what you're creating here is a bipartite graph by the suggested link trades and it is an effective method which I employ presently (although I prefer to trade within my own network rather than using outside sources). Just make sure you keep the links relevant and not to trade with sites which have hundreds of outbound links.

Lastly, make sure you remember that the bottom line is traffic, not PR. You could have a PR7 adult site but if you're targetting a keyword which nobody is searching, then that PR literally wasted.

All in all, your comments were very well said Jay.
WG

09-24-2003, 04:17 PM
WiredGuy Pounding Googlebot Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 34,486	You're correct, most people are looking for PR trades within the same point blocks compared to Google's Toolbar PR ranking. While that's great for spidering effect (different C blocks as well), most webmasters will stay within the same block range using that method unless they're scaling their operation to a large number of websites. Your proposed method is the way of the future in my opinion, Google's already doing content clustering and is starting to experiment with Geo-specific results now as well and it's my guess that they'll be able to determine relevant and irrelevant links within the next few months. Furthermore, I am getting the impression that the number of sites per IP (or per C block class for that matter) will not be penalized in future (or the penalty reduced) based on the ideas you put forth. Also, your point number 3 on your suggested link structures is a pretty good representation so long as the links are relevant to each other. Essentially what you're creating here is a bipartite graph by the suggested link trades and it is an effective method which I employ presently (although I prefer to trade within my own network rather than using outside sources). Just make sure you keep the links relevant and not to trade with sites which have hundreds of outbound links. Lastly, make sure you remember that the bottom line is traffic, not PR. You could have a PR7 adult site but if you're targetting a keyword which nobody is searching, then that PR literally wasted. All in all, your comments were very well said Jay. WG __________________ I play with Google.