Google Issues Stern Warning to Affiliate Sites

[Simon]

Originally Posted by HowlingWulf

Simon any tips on adding email collecters to a site? I'd like to but have no idea what to do really.

In mainstream you'd just sign up with Aweber, Mail Chimp, Get Response, Constant Contact or a similar service. They'd give you the code to put on your site and away you go. Unfortunately, none of them are good for adult offers.

What I suggest is getting a copy of Dada Mail. There's a free version that has a limit of 3 mailing lists, and 1,000 subscribers per list. Once you go past that point you can upgrade without any lost data or need to re-enter anything. The pricing is extremely reasonable for the feature set. http://dadamailproject.com/

I've used it for many years so let me know if you have questions or need a hand with something.

Originally Posted by JustRobert

The linking structure...I find it funny how today part of a normal linking structure is what was once called blind linking. Shit, and if you did that you were called a no good piece of shit blind linking spamming son of a bitch that needs to be whipped...and that's just what UW said

I've started to mix up back links in my own stuff but there is a part of me that feels G will come out one day and say all those click here type of links or the keyword links are BS and the only links of importance are links that are exact domain match because if your site is important real people will link to you by your name, blah blah blah.

You never know what type of change is going to come from G. Especially when their ad revenue goes up every time they do these big updates.

The point not to be missed is that G has been telling us some things all along. Things about needing good content. About not running thin affiliate sites. But most important for this discussion, for the last several years they've shown us, pretty clearly, that they now have algorithms that will detect whether your link profile seems to be natural and if it's growing at a rate that appears organic to them.

You can choose not to believe it, but the G has figured out some things by spidering the entire Internet non-stop for years. Those blind links are part of what you must have in order for your link profile to be judged natural. Their montrously huge data set has shown them that most "real people" (not professional webmasters/site owners) will link from their home pages, profiles, or wherever, using things like "click here," "more," "visit this website," "check this out," "you gotta see this," and other terms that we (the PROFESSIONALS) dismiss as spammy blind links. Well, guess what, the Big G thinks a lot more of the opinons of those real people. So it actually values those links a lot more than most people realize.

BONUS: Here's one other thing that most people either don't know or have heard but still avoid doing because they can't quite bring themselve to believe it or do it.

Let me ask, how often do you think most people here ask someone to link to their site using the rel=NOFOLLOW attribute in the link? With the way that many people insist on getting a specific text and URL combination in the link, I'm guessing not many would want to negate that with an attribute in the link telling the search engines not to follow or give any weight to that link.

Well, for those who don't know or don't want to believe...you *need* to have at least 2% nofollow links just to look like the average site which isn't trying to manipulate search rankings. And actually, many sites that rank high for their keywords will have nofollow on 5%, 10%, or even 15% of their inbound links. Why? Because sites that are actually popular with real people will get linked to from places like forums, blog comments, Facebook, Twitter, and many other places which automatically add nofollow to the links.

Takeaway: Add enough nofollow links to get to at least that 2% number, and potentially use nofollow to help dilute your exact match keyword links by having it added to some of them too.

Okay, you must be tired of reading...'cause I'm tired of writing.