Trading with penalized sites??

[cd34]

A wise man once said:

It is as important to consider who you link to, as it is to consider who is linking to you.

[Useless]

I'd be more concerned about trading links with a link list that's on a stolen domain, like FetshCrawler.com for example, which I see you link to.

I remember some of this being discussed months ago, about linking to domains that may or may not be in Google's god-like graces, but it's damn difficult to know the history of a domain and whether or not it is amongst the beloved.

[jennym]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

I'd be more concerned about trading links with a link list that's on a stolen domain, like FetshCrawler.com for example, which I see you link to.

Hard to keep up with all the thieves and assholes in this business. Those links will be removed as I come across them (tomorrow).

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

I remember some of this being discussed months ago, about linking to domains that may or may not be in Google's god-like graces, but it's damn difficult to know the history of a domain and whether or not it is amongst the beloved.

These particular link trades have been up for quite a long time. They are not from the last few weeks, or even months. That is why I get concerned with the issues I mention above.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

I remember some of this being discussed months ago, about linking to domains that may or may not be in Google's god-like graces, but it's damn difficult to know the history of a domain and whether or not it is amongst the beloved.

One problem is that a surprisingly large number of sponsor FHG domains are on Google's bad list - pretty much all of BrainCash's galleries, for only one prominent example. So you have to balance what converts for you on your TGP vs. taking an SE traffic hit because of links to legitimate but "banned" galleries.

[Linkster]

And you know that certain sponsors galleries are on Googles "bad list" how? I would love to see proof of that (and not a post on a board - actual physical proof)

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Linkster

And you know that certain sponsors galleries are on Googles "bad list" how? I would love to see proof of that (and not a post on a board - actual physical proof)

Sure - sign up for Google webmaster tools and get a site analysis done of a site with lots of outgoing links to freepornofreeporn.com (BrainCash's FHG domain) - you'll see freepornofreeporn.com in red and red connecting lines galore and text informing you that links to this domain penalize your search results because they appear to contain exploits, etc.

My intent was not to pick on BrainCash (I think they're a fine program) - but that was one very prominent example I remembered from when I did this a few months ago. There are several others. My criticism is more of Google, as none of the "redlined" sponsor FHGs appeared to have any real exploits anywhere in their code.

[Linkster]

Are you sure you were doing that from within Google tools - the only analysis program I know they have in the WM tools is the page analysis which doesnt do anything close to what you are talking about?

What it sounds like you are talking about is the SiteAdvisor pages:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/freepornofreeporn.com
Which has nothing whatsoever to do with Googles banning of pages

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Linkster

Are you sure you were doing that from within Google tools - the only analysis program I know they have in the WM tools is the page analysis which doesnt do anything close to what you are talking about?

What it sounds like you are talking about is the SiteAdvisor pages:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/freepornofreeporn.com
Which has nothing whatsoever to do with Googles banning of pages

Well, hell - you are correct, my friend. It was several months ago, and I did the analysis to try and find out why I was getting such crappy (read - zero) PR on that one domain but not on any of my others. So yes, I conflated that w/ Google in my head. Mea culpa. |bus|

But still - if McAfee redlines certain domains for such reasons, can you be 100% sure Google isn't doing the same or similar? Linking to galleries that link to sponsor popups, etc? And again, sponsor popups seem to be the *only* thing I could find about any of those FHG domains that would create a red flag for Google, McAfee or whoever.

[jennym]

Originally Posted by cd34

A wise man once said:

It is as important to consider who you link to, as it is to consider who is linking to you.

So, your answer to my post would have been

yes
yes
1)yes, no, yes
2)yes, no, yes

Thanks