Google's NoFollow

John Scott · 12-21-2005, 11:58 PM

Reading Matt Cutt's blog the other day, I kind of get the feeling that Google is trying to bully the Internet into wide use of the nofollow attribute.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-link-follow-up/
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/tell-m...our-backlinks/

A few forums have even implemented these nofollows in their software.

To me, it just seems like intimidation and bullying.

Just FYI, we won't be doing that here, and if Google doesn't like it they can go to hell.

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 12:12 AM

Good.

Whatever value forum links and sig links have, why not let your posters have that as a reward for being active members of your forum community?

Without members, there is no forum.

John Scott · 12-22-2005, 12:13 AM

True.

And I just feel it's wrong for Google to try to force people to change their code just to help Google make billions of dollars.

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 12:25 AM

That too. I am not anti-Google. I like and admire Google. And I have no objections to them making millions of dollars if they can. But if they need to discount links to do it, let them figure out a way to do it. Otherwise, the white hats do all the work and the black and grey hats reap the benefits.

John Scott · 12-22-2005, 12:32 AM

I'm not anti-Google. I just object to the way they do things on occasion.

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 12:38 AM

Their timing sure does suck sometimes. I'm not an internet merchant but if I were i'd be more than a little ticked at their penchant for shaking everything up just before the biggest retail season ofthe year.

Johan007 · 12-22-2005, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Just FYI, we won't be doing that here, and if Google doesn't like it they can go to hell.

Thanks John, one my regular forums Ozzu have done it and I am not impressed. I too did it for my movie forum but I am now going to remove it and just have some more mods(not easy to find).

John Scott · 12-22-2005, 05:50 AM

SEO Chat did that too.

Ferre · 12-22-2005, 07:02 AM

After reading the dude's articles, it seems to me that Google doesn't like site owners to sell advertisement space themselves and they are working on giving anything that isn't their own adsense a bad name. The call it "link buying" and are actively "branding" this phrase as being a bad thing to do.

After a while site owners will be afraid to put anything on their site besides adsense, only to be sure not to get penalized by the Google-czar.

Sick way of doing busyness if you ask me, but very much a sign of the times we live in.

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferre

After a while site owners will be afraid to put anything on their site besides adsense, only to be sure not to get penalized by the Google-czar.

It depends what the other ads are. You can certainly have other advertising on the same page as AdSense - just make sure it isn't a direct competitor.

They are fine with Amazon, for example, or similar specific affiliate ads.

Ferre · 12-22-2005, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minstrel

It depends what the other ads are. You can certainly have other advertising on the same page as AdSense - just make sure it isn't a direct competitor.

They are fine with Amazon, for example, or similar specific affiliate ads.

That's what I meant. Google-czar is going to tell site owners what and what not do do with their own space.

next is that they just drop sites out of their serps who don't have any approved ads... or no ads.

Google is a victim of its own power, it corrupts. To what level, well, time will tell they are just starting, let's find out, and I'm sure we will.

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferre

That's what I meant. Google-czar is going to tell site owners what and what not do do with their own space.

No. Not any more than other advertisers. It's a common part of the ToS for affiliates. Amazon and barnes, for example, won't let you have competitors ads on the same pages (at least that used to be true - haven't checked recently). DigitalPoint's Coop and LinkVault prohibit each other's ads on the same pages.

It's not telling you what you can or cannot do with your own pages. It's simply saying if you want to be a part of our affiliate network, don't run ads (like Yahoo's version, YPN or whatever) that are in direct competition with ours.

That's pretty common advertising practice for affiliates. Nothing really evil about it at all, IMO.

Ferre · 12-22-2005, 10:06 AM

Yep, but all those companies you mention have no influence at all in the traffic to your site. Google does, and can use that power to exclude any site they wish from the serps.

Who would know if Google would, say, serve 40% less sites in the serps (or top pages) that use a competition's ad program on their pages? they are pretty good at keeping their algo a secret anyway.

I'm not saying they do that, I do say they can, and no one can check if they really would.

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 10:18 AM

*shrug*

I think it unlikely. I don't think Google needs to do that so why would they risk their reputation? Their reputation as the premier "do no evil" search engine is worth billions to them.

Ferre · 12-22-2005, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minstrel

*shrug*

I think it unlikely. I don't think Google needs to do that so why would they risk their reputation? Their reputation as the premier "do no evil" search engine is worth billions to them.

yep, and for a few billion it is very easy to maintain that image. It's only an image, easy to maintain with some $$

minstrel · 12-22-2005, 08:21 PM

Damn, you are cynical.

Ferre · 12-22-2005, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minstrel

Damn, you are cynical.

Well, I fail to see why I should trust any multinational with unreasonable power that spends tons on their image. I'm not that naive.

+ the fact that they do manipulate the internet in some sort of manner, earning billions in doing it.