Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Unregistered
aliases
- robwatts
- rob
- robwatts
- robwatts
- rob
- robwatts
- rob watts
- robwatts
- Rob - SEO Advice
- rob watts
- Rob
- robwatts
- robwatts
- Rob
- Rob
robwatts
Is this you? Claim Profile »
7 months ago
in Gnomadic Hearts on Sukhjit
Love this - your nephew is hugely talented too!
1 reply
sukhjit
@robbwatts RE: Gnome story fact
1 year ago
in Comment Spam Warning Signs on Andy Beard - Internet Business Systems Discussion
Nice list - I'm thinking of adding a little thing to my comment form that catches the query string and allows me to see the referal in the back end. Too many people land on my blog and leave a comment just because it's a dofollow blog.
Kinda defeats the whole object of the exercise if you ask me. Not to mention wastes mine and their time too.
What part of read the comments policy can't they understand I wonder.
Kinda defeats the whole object of the exercise if you ask me. Not to mention wastes mine and their time too.
What part of read the comments policy can't they understand I wonder.
1 reply
Andy Beard
There is a plugin that does it, from one of the core WP devs.. maybe it was from Donncha...
Yup here you go
http://ocaoimh.ie/comment-referrers/
Yup here you go
http://ocaoimh.ie/comment-referrers/
1 year ago
in Google PageRank Directory Clanger on Andy Beard - Internet Business Systems Discussion
Andy, have you nofollowed your outgoing review links? If not do you ever intend to? I know you've written about it previously, was just wondering whether your position had shifted any since this whole brouha.
1 reply
Andy Beard
Rob only in the Bidvertiser review, and that was because they asked for it specifically.
Other reviews have editorial links, not just to the person ordering a review but to sites referred to in the context of the review.
Based on Google's "no commitment to telling anything useful" stance, and unwillingness to clear up the grey area, I can't make any changes yet.
I can't use the current reinclusion request form without making some changes, but I have real ethical problems being forced to nofollow editorial links that were previously given, not to mention the technical difficulties of not sending pings and getting my site blacklisted as a trackback spammer with nofollow links.
Other reviews have editorial links, not just to the person ordering a review but to sites referred to in the context of the review.
Based on Google's "no commitment to telling anything useful" stance, and unwillingness to clear up the grey area, I can't make any changes yet.
I can't use the current reinclusion request form without making some changes, but I have real ethical problems being forced to nofollow editorial links that were previously given, not to mention the technical difficulties of not sending pings and getting my site blacklisted as a trackback spammer with nofollow links.
1 year ago
in Will Google Offer Amnesty To SocialSpark & PayPerPost Bloggers? on Andy Beard - Internet Business Systems Discussion
Andy thanks for the mention and well said too. I hope you don't mind if I expand a little on my own experience.
You are right, I like most people in this space went in and had a look and experimented with adding links (nofollowed I might add) to the tiny url links that PPP provided as add on options. I never did take up any of their options as most of what I saw didn't really pertain to my blog audience or niche. PPP may well be the reason why Ive been dinged, but then again there are of course a number of possible other reasons.Perhaps it was one of my other posts that discussed the launch of reviewme or maybe it was the single paid review I did for sponsored reviews for the bidvertiser product, or perhaps it was my support for dofollow, or maybe it was for the odd post I've wriiten criticising what goog do and how they do it sometimes, or maybe its my nofollowed aff url to TLA. Ive certainly never outputted a single TLA adlink.
Recently I also noticed a tail off on some of the terms I previously ranked pretty well on, so suspect that some of what's been applied to me is filtering through to my ranking ability too.
What may be clear is that they have taken linking (in any form) to TLA or PPP or reviewme as some kind of endorsement for a service that they are diametrically opposed to, despite their nofollow requests it would seem in the absence of any other explanation that this is the approach they've adopted by way of sending out the message that if you support such services, then you run the risk of eventual exclusion.
The upshot is that I'll never know for certain the reason why I was dinged.
What I do know is that to expect a person to use that reinclusion thing and lay down like someone begging forgiveness for some perceived crime against the Googmanity is a little bit rich and not really something I believe is justified or feel comfortable doing. I'll still blog, I'll still write good stuff and bad! Google can most certainly live without me and thankfully as can I without Google, it's just a little sad and ultimately negative of them to behave like this.
I was brought up to stand up to bullies behave in a way that treated people with courtesy and respect. I can't lie when I say that in some ways I am disappointed with them as I thought they were bigger people than this, yet the evidence of their actions seems to suggest that not all of them are; which leads me on to this whole thing about who is applying these penalties and under what kind of guidance.I'd say its been a scripted approach with a one look glance perhaps by some who might not be fully appraised with what they are doing. All we can do is speculate and draw conclusions. Be they right or wrong they'll fit the hypothesis of the ev idence presented, and the evidence presented suggests that all of this stuff was pretty uneccessary.
As for an amnesty...who knows. It seems that if you say the right things and take the right actions then they'll lift whatevcer it is that they've applied to you. At least that's been the experience of SEG.
Cheers
Rob
You are right, I like most people in this space went in and had a look and experimented with adding links (nofollowed I might add) to the tiny url links that PPP provided as add on options. I never did take up any of their options as most of what I saw didn't really pertain to my blog audience or niche. PPP may well be the reason why Ive been dinged, but then again there are of course a number of possible other reasons.Perhaps it was one of my other posts that discussed the launch of reviewme or maybe it was the single paid review I did for sponsored reviews for the bidvertiser product, or perhaps it was my support for dofollow, or maybe it was for the odd post I've wriiten criticising what goog do and how they do it sometimes, or maybe its my nofollowed aff url to TLA. Ive certainly never outputted a single TLA adlink.
Recently I also noticed a tail off on some of the terms I previously ranked pretty well on, so suspect that some of what's been applied to me is filtering through to my ranking ability too.
What may be clear is that they have taken linking (in any form) to TLA or PPP or reviewme as some kind of endorsement for a service that they are diametrically opposed to, despite their nofollow requests it would seem in the absence of any other explanation that this is the approach they've adopted by way of sending out the message that if you support such services, then you run the risk of eventual exclusion.
The upshot is that I'll never know for certain the reason why I was dinged.
What I do know is that to expect a person to use that reinclusion thing and lay down like someone begging forgiveness for some perceived crime against the Googmanity is a little bit rich and not really something I believe is justified or feel comfortable doing. I'll still blog, I'll still write good stuff and bad! Google can most certainly live without me and thankfully as can I without Google, it's just a little sad and ultimately negative of them to behave like this.
I was brought up to stand up to bullies behave in a way that treated people with courtesy and respect. I can't lie when I say that in some ways I am disappointed with them as I thought they were bigger people than this, yet the evidence of their actions seems to suggest that not all of them are; which leads me on to this whole thing about who is applying these penalties and under what kind of guidance.I'd say its been a scripted approach with a one look glance perhaps by some who might not be fully appraised with what they are doing. All we can do is speculate and draw conclusions. Be they right or wrong they'll fit the hypothesis of the ev idence presented, and the evidence presented suggests that all of this stuff was pretty uneccessary.
As for an amnesty...who knows. It seems that if you say the right things and take the right actions then they'll lift whatevcer it is that they've applied to you. At least that's been the experience of SEG.
Cheers
Rob
1 reply
Andy Beard
Rob I look on amnesty as a little beyond begging for a pardon after putting right any wrongly perceived wrongs.
I think this is especially true when many of supposed wrongs were not, and still are not clearly defined or evenly applied, with the sites most influential to search results.
Google's current practice is also extremely unfair to the self employed who do not have the right to link through to the people feeding their families.
I think this is especially true when many of supposed wrongs were not, and still are not clearly defined or evenly applied, with the sites most influential to search results.
Google's current practice is also extremely unfair to the self employed who do not have the right to link through to the people feeding their families.
1 year ago
in Real or Fake PageRank Update In Progress (round 3) on Andy Beard - Internet Business Systems Discussion
Absolutely mad-well I've now slipped to a nice juicy pr2- hmmn must be those nofollowed alinks to TLA and PPP ...
1 reply
Andy Beard
Rob I distinctly remember you writing a paid review for Bidvertiser I think... which had nofollow on the links as well.
1 year ago
in Blogcatalog – Does Onclick Pass PageRank? on Andy Beard - Internet Business Systems Discussion
The link command being all squiffy doesn't help matters either, add a 'just because it shows as a backlink doesn't necesarilly mean that it passes pagerank' theory into the mix and, well, suffice to say we could all end up in circuitous go nowhere very fast cul-de-sacs.
I get why BC want to track such things sure, info is power etc. Maybe they aren't interested in users who surf Javascript disabled who knows, a detractor might say that this was a way of restricting link juice but...heck that would be so pre 2007 it just wouldn't be funny. PR leakage I'm sure is the least of a site like BC's worries. We all can all name a good few domains that link out like crazy yet rank for many things. Where is the PR leakage theory there I ask?
Im sure too that those search dudes play around in the space and plant all manner of anti seo landmines all over the shop simply to cause confusion and uncertainty. They'd be silly not to. Why they still give us guys tools to deconstruct them is very odd and yes, makes you think twice about what we are being shown anyways!
The onclick example in that SEW thread is slightly different to this too, as in the BC onclick event example, it calls a function and not a full url. The example cited at SEW cited too separate full urls. The one in the href and the one in the onclick call, a marginal difference but a difference nontheless.
I'm surpised that MC and BW even commented in that thread as really, there shouldn't be any problem with a company tracking what their users do. Where was the harm in washington post doing what they did? Who got killed even. Why should a little bit of tracking effect the ultimate destination? As long as the user ends up at what they see in the status bar then it really shouldn't matter.
That said, as the onclick event would only work for users with JS enabled, then perhaps it would be beter for them to simply document.write the output of the onclick aspect of the code, that way, the bot wouldn't see it anyway, so it becomes a moot point.
Ultimately the intent is to give users a link and track user behaviour. The SE's shouldn't get all bent out of shape over that.
I get why BC want to track such things sure, info is power etc. Maybe they aren't interested in users who surf Javascript disabled who knows, a detractor might say that this was a way of restricting link juice but...heck that would be so pre 2007 it just wouldn't be funny. PR leakage I'm sure is the least of a site like BC's worries. We all can all name a good few domains that link out like crazy yet rank for many things. Where is the PR leakage theory there I ask?
Im sure too that those search dudes play around in the space and plant all manner of anti seo landmines all over the shop simply to cause confusion and uncertainty. They'd be silly not to. Why they still give us guys tools to deconstruct them is very odd and yes, makes you think twice about what we are being shown anyways!
The onclick example in that SEW thread is slightly different to this too, as in the BC onclick event example, it calls a function and not a full url. The example cited at SEW cited too separate full urls. The one in the href and the one in the onclick call, a marginal difference but a difference nontheless.
I'm surpised that MC and BW even commented in that thread as really, there shouldn't be any problem with a company tracking what their users do. Where was the harm in washington post doing what they did? Who got killed even. Why should a little bit of tracking effect the ultimate destination? As long as the user ends up at what they see in the status bar then it really shouldn't matter.
That said, as the onclick event would only work for users with JS enabled, then perhaps it would be beter for them to simply document.write the output of the onclick aspect of the code, that way, the bot wouldn't see it anyway, so it becomes a moot point.
Ultimately the intent is to give users a link and track user behaviour. The SE's shouldn't get all bent out of shape over that.
1 reply
Dane Morgan
The harm, and the thing that Brian seems to have been hitting on was that these links were in a paid "blogroll". Even if one believes that onclick tracking automatically means no passing, and even if there were no onclick tracking in these links Google would have sought to blog PR passing from them.
It's okay to sell links, but only for those on Google's short list, and it would seem that, at least a year ago, the Post wasn't on that list.
It's okay to sell links, but only for those on Google's short list, and it would seem that, at least a year ago, the Post wasn't on that list.
1 year ago
in Blogcatalog – Does Onclick Pass PageRank? on Andy Beard - Internet Business Systems Discussion
I think the noscript tag would be a nice addition in making sure a vanilla html link was there for reference purposes or for those with script disabled. (We all know the power of the noscript tag from the recent SEJ outing of that payday loan hitcounter site).
For me, the best implentation would be some kind of 301 implementation that would be seen by all.
Something like click.php?url=url which when followed returned
header('HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently');
header('Location: '.$url);
Although such an approach would need a little additional work to check if it was a verified url at the backend.
Provided its not a 302, then personally, I dont see any problem.
In terms of their existing set up, my gut feeling is that the onclick event is irrelevant and that PR is passed simply because its contained within a straight a href container. Its not produced via document.write (which would be an issue as the bots wouldnt see it)
Anyhow, this can be tested can it not? Just gotta stick up a secret page or domain and point a page from BC to the page that nobody knows about, and voila, end of hypothesis. :D
For me, the best implentation would be some kind of 301 implementation that would be seen by all.
Something like click.php?url=url which when followed returned
header('HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently');
header('Location: '.$url);
Although such an approach would need a little additional work to check if it was a verified url at the backend.
Provided its not a 302, then personally, I dont see any problem.
In terms of their existing set up, my gut feeling is that the onclick event is irrelevant and that PR is passed simply because its contained within a straight a href container. Its not produced via document.write (which would be an issue as the bots wouldnt see it)
Anyhow, this can be tested can it not? Just gotta stick up a secret page or domain and point a page from BC to the page that nobody knows about, and voila, end of hypothesis. :D
1 reply
Andy Beard
A test would only prove some, just like the example screenshot is proof that some do pass juice.
I also found some blogs whilst testing that didn't have any backlinks being reported at all, from anywhere!
A redirect isn't obvious for users, and is ugly just like the Alexa redirects - there are a few other options but the current one in use is the cleanest.
If you use other methods, you are hiding the fact you are redirecting.
There really should be a published best practice or clearer indication.
I also found some blogs whilst testing that didn't have any backlinks being reported at all, from anywhere!
A redirect isn't obvious for users, and is ugly just like the Alexa redirects - there are a few other options but the current one in use is the cleanest.
If you use other methods, you are hiding the fact you are redirecting.
There really should be a published best practice or clearer indication.
