John Bokma wrote:
> Incognito wrote:
>
>> You guys don't honestly think someone will not find a blackhat
>> technique in this newER TrustRank, do you?
>
> I haven't read it, but if once trust can be reduced if one links to bad
> sites, who is going to risk that? I mean, if I link to your site, and
> suddenly my postion drops 20 places for all my important phrases, am I
> going to link to you? Moreover, if my dropping 20 places makes others who
> link to me drop 5 places? And people linking to them drop 1 place?
>
> If linking to a bad site means you both lose position and IBLs (and hence
> more position)...
>
> (Mind: I haven't read the document yet).
>
>> If so, you're walking around
>> blindfolded. Don't get me wrong, I hate spammers with the best of them,
>> but there will always be blackhat stuff that will work for rank very
>> well.
>
> Blackhat stuff has become harder and harder in my opinion. I remember the
> days one could run a perl script and kick hundreds of pages in Altavista
> and some other SEs within 24 hours, and get many, many hits on pages
> containing just crap.
So was that /you/, Mr. Perl? *smile*
The ability to cheat prevails, but it becomes more and more expensive, I
think. Once it becomes more expensive than its rewards, blackhat will reach
an end.
Nowadays, bandwidth goes up and the net grows enormously, which is worrying.
Traffic becomes less manageable.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
|
|
