This might be relevant to some of the linklist problems

[LowryBigwood]

I don't know if it's just me or what, but I am not in agreement with most of what is being said against recip links. My opinion on this matter is if the link offers something valuable to your visitors that they will be interested in, then it's not a bad thing.

Of course these are not the best type of links to have, but I think if done right, they can be effective in helping your rankings.

Useless, your idea sounds nice, but you might as well call it a hub.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by LowryBigwood

Useless, your idea sounds nice, but you might as well call it a hub.

Why? It's not as if it would be a listing of my clean free sites. (I don't have any.) It wouldn't be a listing of HFSs or HFGs. I can't see how it could be considered a hub in any manner. Perhaps you think traffic can't be built this way. I'd like to know why.

[LowryBigwood]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

Why? It's not as if it would be a listing of my clean free sites. (I don't have any.) It wouldn't be a listing of HFSs or HFGs. I can't see how it could be considered a hub in any manner. Perhaps you think traffic can't be built this way. I'd like to know why.

I took it as you listing only your own sites without recips on initial read of your previous post. It does seem to me that you'd be going against the current biz model(which may be not be a bad thing) of linklists. I'm sure you can get links from blogs and such. Sure, freesite recips are not giving much link juice back, but I believe they do provide some benefit you shouldn't neglect.

It's not that I think traffic cannot be built in that manner, but I do believe there's more to it than that simple change. It is a very interesting idea though, and I'd like to see how it performs for you.

[Halfdeck]

I don't know if it's just me or what, but I am not in agreement with most of what is being said against recip links. My opinion on this matter is if the link offers something valuable to your visitors that they will be interested in, then it's not a bad thing.

Reciprocal links, if not excessive and not obviously manipulative, are fine. Many trusted sites link to each other organically every day. Also the blog patent kinda suggests having a link to your site in the sidebar of a high profile site is a sign of quality.

But many LLs not only have thousands of recips pointing at them but 99.99% of their backlinks are from reciprocal links. I believe a site with a more balanced link profile will perform better.

In this post, Matt Cutts says:

Reciprocal links by themselves aren't automatically bad, but we've communicated before that there is such a thing as excessive reciprocal linking.

A hypothetical:

Take link list A with 100 reciprocal links, TBPR 1 each. Due to them being reciprocal, Google devalues them by 2%, so those links are really worth TBPR 98 total (I know TBPR 1+1 doesn't add up to 2, but lets pretend they do for a sec. I'm also not saying TBPR = higher ranking; its a metric of inbound juice that hints at how much anchor text and other factors are coming through).

Now the site owner receives 1000 more submissions each link worth TBPR 1. Say Google devalues IBL now at 5%. So instead of 1100 TBPR you got 1045. Still, 1045 is better than 0.

Throw on 10,000 more submits. Say that triggers the "excessive reciprocal link" flag. Devaluation goes up to 60%.

Initially, you see higher and higher rankings, but as you pile on more and more recips, you hit a ceiling - more submits = more devaluation so even if your ranking improves the rate of movement becomes slower and slower.

[LowryBigwood]

Originally Posted by Halfdeck

Reciprocal links, if not excessive and not obviously manipulative, are fine. Many trusted sites link to each other organically every day. Also the blog patent kinda suggests having a link to your site in the sidebar of a high profile site is a sign of quality.

But many LLs not only have thousands of recips pointing at them but 99.99% of their backlinks are from reciprocal links. I believe a site with a more balanced link profile will perform better.

In this post, Matt Cutts says:

This is more along the lines of my thinking on recips. It just does not ANY sense whatsoever to say all recip linking is bad. Combine lower quality recip links with higher quality (1 way organic links if possible) and that will out perform high quality 1 way organic links by themselves IMHO. And then combining other types of incoming links with those should boost your site even further. Right?

Originally Posted by Halfdeck

A hypothetical:

Take link list A with 100 reciprocal links, TBPR 1 each. Due to them being reciprocal, Google devalues them by 2%, so those links are really worth TBPR 98 total (I know TBPR 1+1 doesn't add up to 2, but lets pretend they do for a sec. I'm also not saying TBPR = higher ranking; its a metric of inbound juice that hints at how much anchor text and other factors are coming through).

Now the site owner receives 1000 more submissions each link worth TBPR 1. Say Google devalues IBL now at 5%. So instead of 1100 TBPR you got 1045. Still, 1045 is better than 0.

Throw on 10,000 more submits. Say that triggers the "excessive reciprocal link" flag. Devaluation goes up to 60%.

Initially, you see higher and higher rankings, but as you pile on more and more recips, you hit a ceiling - more submits = more devaluation so even if your ranking improves the rate of movement becomes slower and slower.

Interesting hypothetical and well thought out.

Question: What if you are able to cut down on the identical anchor text that is being placed on your submissions as well as change the recip url to a page that would not be linking back directly?

For example, I have a freesites page, a pics galleries page, and a vids gallery page per niche. If I was to change my recip url to point to pics or vids gallery pages instead of my freesites page, then my recip links would not be direct anymore. Would that be a better way of handling my recips in your opinion?

Also, what's the best way to fight the devaluation process? Simply gain more high quality incoming links?

[Halfdeck]

Would that be a better way of handling my recips in your opinion?

It's an improvement but you're still leaving a detectable pattern.

Also, what's the best way to fight the devaluation process?

You need Google to trust your backlinks and outlinks.

[ronnie]

Originally Posted by LowryBigwood

I don't know if it's just me or what, but I am not in agreement with most of what is being said against recip links. My opinion on this matter is if the link offers something valuable to your visitors that they will be interested in, then it's not a bad thing.

Of course these are not the best type of links to have, but I think if done right, they can be effective in helping your rankings.

Useless, your idea sounds nice, but you might as well call it a hub.

The SE's are looking to provide the best results to surfers, quality content. If people use methods such as link trading to boost their "popularity" , noticed by a pattern, is that a quality site(s)? If I was the SE, I'd think not. It's not natural (pattern). It could be a good site, but what are the chances? We know the SE's can not visit each site to see, so they have to do it mechanically.

LL owners do similar things. Banning certian hosts, blacklisting IP's, ect. Sponsors do it by not allowing certian countries. Are these not the same type "patterns". Though they might not all be bad, it's a pretty good chance they are.

Maybe I am off base or getting off topic.