Using nofollow on traffic/link trades
 

I have noticed some sites using rel="nofollow" on their toplist links. I think it is bullshit to use rel="nofollow" for your trades. What do you think?

Depends on what you agree with people, but you should be upfront about it.

Like Markul says it's just down to whatever is agreed. You have to be specific when you do the deal, these things should always be checked at the time.

??? What is there to agree upon. Most sites use traffic scripts to generate their toplists. Depending on what the webmaster inputs into the template, the script will generate nofollow for all trades or none. Unless it is a hardlink, the webmaster has no discretion to use nofollow for a single trade. Its either all or none.

The choice then is to trade or not to trade with sites using nofollow with their trades.

Lots of different ways to do it :2 cents:

I would be pissed if I traded hardlinks and some retard used nofollow on my links.

Some webmasters have their heads so far up their asses worried about PR sculpting that they use rel=nofollow on all external links, including traffic trades, without any real thought about what they are doing. Nofollow was introduced by Google as a way to discourage blog spamming. It was never intended to be used on sites legitimately linking back to you.

if it's a traffic trade rel=nofollow is the way to go :thumbsup
if it's a link trade then i would not bother.

Why bother,trade links are for getting traffic anyway not link juice.

google wants you to do it proper thats why, nofollow is way to go, even if you buy ads, you are suppose to nofollow

Of course. However OP is talking about toplist traffic trades. If its not a hardlink, but toplist redicret - it does not matter for you. Actually its even pretty normal and understandable.

:2 cents: