Founder:

I agree completely. For some time there has been debate as whether sites get sandboxed, or links get sandboxed. My contention is that both do.

Although I have no evidence, I suspect that all sites are assigned a trust factor of between 0 and 1. Further I think that new sites get a rather low default value, for example maybe .3

I think that as G learns more about a site, it begins increasing the trust factor. But, if suspicious activity is detected, the factor is either not graduated, or possibly reduced.

If true, a new site really can't do much other than behave well and wait it out. Of course adding content and building links is still required, but they would be best done in moderation.

Now we go to links and aging. It is probably safe to assume that G is at least somewhat practicing what they applied for in the patent doc. If a link's value increases over time, this would certainly explain the behavior you have documented.

If you buy into the 'trust factor' for sites concept, it is easy to conclude that links might have the same rules. New links may have a low initial trust factor, which may in part be inherited from the originating page. If over some time, the link behaves normally (changes to anchor might be considered) its trust factor increases over time.

It may not be the only explanation, but it is certainly is viable in my view.

/*tom*/