Comments on: Nofollow and How Google Really Verifies Links

By: iMarketingGuru

iMarketingGuru — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:28:43 +0000

The nofollow attribute needs to be taken care of – and for the user data, temporal analysis must be a central ingredient to Google’s algorithms. Without the study of user data, the Google engines wouldn’t be capable of generating nice SERPs. I agree full-heartedly with “It should be a way for publishers to tell the search engines that they have not audited the link and can therefore not vouch for it’s integrity.”. I feel as though, if Google looked on the NoFollows in this way, then the ability for more quality content would increase. There needs to just be even more social congruency with the SERPs – Web 2.0 (People), Web 3.0 (Perfect data and Semantics), Web 4.0 (The WebOS/Flawless AI). That’s what I believe.

By: Google ignoring NoFollow?

Google ignoring NoFollow? — Sun, 27 May 2007 08:24:09 +0000

[...] There are now discussions at SEO Black Hat and The V7N Network intimating that Google may not be following its own rules with NoFollow. The theory, originally proposed by Link Building Blog, is that in some cases, NoFollow’ed links may still pass link juice. [...]

By: adfunk

adfunk — Sun, 27 May 2007 00:34:02 +0000

I agree with much of what has been said.

You may get some trackback traffic which may be worst more than any increase in your backlinks.

Its a case of more of everything the better.

By: Josh

Josh — Fri, 25 May 2007 06:30:12 +0000

I’m not sure if it was because Google followed the rel=nofollow. If he ranked #14 for ’spiderman 3 xbox review’, it is not surprising that he is #8 for ‘piderman 3 xbox review’. If you search Google for the latter term, Google will ask, “Did you mean: spiderman 3 xbox review?” Google guesses that “piderman” is a mispelling of “spiderman”.

A more accurate experiment would be to try to rank for a nonsense word that has no results in the SERPs like “asdfjieakfnvd” — and only use that word one time in link text that is rel=nofollowed…

By: m1t0s1s

m1t0s1s — Thu, 17 May 2007 05:08:23 +0000

sorry, I should of said

google does index what is past those links.

By: m1t0s1s

m1t0s1s — Mon, 14 May 2007 18:49:02 +0000

Quads, could you add this to my comment:

Google for baconpolenta31337 and nofollownoindexnocache to see the results of my nofollow experiments.

By: m1t0s1s

m1t0s1s — Mon, 14 May 2007 18:25:59 +0000

To SixSigma: The general consensus is that google does index what is passed those links, but it doesn’t pass any value to them, unless the above post is true -).

This is pure speculation, but it may take a certain number of nofollow links to actually be indexed. I will test this on my site, theycann.com

This comes from google’s charter to “index all the worlds information”, no matter how valueless.

By: SixSigma

SixSigma — Sat, 12 May 2007 18:17:15 +0000

I blogged about this last year when I did an experiment on a forum I frequent. The forum doesn’t require registration and it allows your name to link to your site, in the same way blog comments do. It fights spam pretty effectively by using a robust filter, moderators, and rel=nofollow for all links.

The test was simple, I changed by display name to a unique term not used in any other links to my site and waited a few weeks. Then I checked Google’s webmaster tools (the sitemaps one), and that unique term was showing up as a back link keyword.

Does it mean that it passes value? I don’t know. But it does mean that Google doesn’t ignore it.

By: m1t0s1s

m1t0s1s — Sat, 12 May 2007 06:14:28 +0000

I should mention the rel=’prefetch’ attribute.

By: QuadsZilla

QuadsZilla — Fri, 11 May 2007 07:12:25 +0000

Google can, from the toolbar, determine when someone goes from one page to another. Sure, i suppose that the person could be typing in the url that happens to be a link on the page, but 98 times out of a hundred or more it will just be the person clicking the link.