Does PR Sculpting Work?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by activeco

And btw do you still use the 'googleoff' tags?

And I forgot the mention:

<!--googleoff: anchor--> 
<a href="http://www.example.com/example.html?googlebot=nocrawl" rel="noindex,nofollow,nsfw">Non-sense</a> 
<!--googleon: anchor-->

I know after that disussion that <!--googleoff: anchor--> and <!--googleon: anchor--> are not for the organic search. But I also never said that I am born SEO.
So how would google see or perceive those? As comments or?

So what is wrong with rel attributes?

Google does not support the noindex? What is the damage having that? NONE!
Google supports the nofollow? YES!
Google does not support the nsfw? Many Social Bookmarking platforms do. It is a microformat. So what is the damage? NONE!

Doesn't Google support googlebot=nocrawl? YES!

Does Google support Robots.txt? YES!

So after all what happens if I implement the above?

Google will not crawl or follow the link!!! Any problems with that implementation? NO!

WOW! What for a horrible mistake! What a disaster! Do you call that black hat too? I rather would call it Yellow hat!

It is like having markup warnings on my web site. RIDICULOUS!!!

Oh, and please do not come up with a story as you did already elsewhere, that you can only use one rel attribute in a link.

I just felt like clarifying! OK?

Activeco any further comments please?

[kevsta]

anyway...

so what did we decide in the end? that we think it probably does work, but not well enough, or predictably enough to spend time on ?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kevsta

anyway...

so what did we decide in the end? that we think it probably does work, but not well enough, or predictably enough to spend time on ?

If you want my opinion, just do you work as that link condom does not exist. Spend your time on your site navigation structure and hierarchy.

And if you want to sell links, etc, then follow the technique I introduced above Does PR Sculpting Work? instead of the using that non-standard ridiculous attribute (nofollow).

I repeat: MY OPINION!

[activeco]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I did not say that was from my secret lab. I said I did not want to share my technique writing a tutorial after the nice comments I got.

To clarify: Who else is implementing the method I mentioned in this thread (Redirects 302 and X-Robots) as I mentioned above, instead of using nofollow. Or where did you read that elsewhere?

You still don't get it, do you?
'X-robots-tag' IS THE SAME as the '<META name='robots'..>' tag. How many people do use it?

Why was it introduced? Well for a good reason. You can use META tags only in html documents. Putting this right in the header enables other application types to deal with robots, but for a html document it doesn't make any difference.

End of story.

The end of story for this thread was actually definitive answer Jaan provided:

Well what I take away from this is that sure PR Sculpting can work, it is not nearly worth all the hype that many of the SEOers out there are making it out to be.

Let me emphasize that PR sculpting DOES work.
The question about actual benefits of it deserves a new thread.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by activeco

You still don't get it, do you?
'X-robots-tag' IS THE SAME as the '<META name='robots'..>' tag. How many people use it?

I know that. And I use that. How many other people do that, I have no idea.

Originally Posted by activeco

Why was it introduced? Well for a good reason. You can use META tags only in html documents.

Putting this right in the header enables other application types to deal with robots, but for a html document it doesn't make any difference.

Do you mean that adding the X-Robots in the .htaccess file instead does not work for HTML files? I hope not!
Can you tell us why doesn't this page get indexed by Google?
Google & Yahoo Crawlability

I will show you why: View HTTP Request and Response Header

Originally Posted by activeco

The end of story for this thread was actually definitive answer Jaan provided:

Let me emphasize that PR sculpting DOES work.
The question about actual benefits of it deserves a new thread.

I never doubted that PR sculpting works. As a Web Architect I just consider the way it is presented all over the place as insufficient.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Just because you most probably cannot perceive or understand the discussed technical aspects in this thread, due to lack of knowledge or experience, or whatever that should be, does not give you the right to underestimate all of us here.

I was not the one asking for proof and if you could read you would see that I was on your side in the matter. To bad your not smart enough to see that.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If that is your intention, and you are not willing to contribute in this thread, just take your sand bucket and play somewhere else Janeth.

Well maybe you should really study up on your English and go back and read all my post.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Or can we stay on topic?

Or should I also go off topic and start a discussion about how people claiming to be professional SEOs making themselves ridiculous?

You've been talking about yourself a lot in the thread not sure why you should stop now.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by activeco

The end of story for this thread was actually definitive answer Jaan provided:

EXACTLY!!! That was my point at my previous post. I just read Jaan's post after posting my previous post!

Thanks Google Team for confirming.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I was not the one asking for proof and if you could read you would see that I was on your side in the matter. To bad your not smart enough to see that.



Well maybe you should really study up on your English and go back and read all my post.



You've been talking about yourself a lot in the thread not sure why you should stop now.

Holy Sh...t sister. I am aware that my English is not so good and often I misunderstand some stuff.

I am terribly sorry! My honest apologies.


To all contributors of the thread:

I think that the discussion just began. And I think we should stick on the thread instead of starting a new one.

Don't you all think too?

[activeco]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Do you mean that adding the X-Robots in the .htaccess file instead does not work for HTML files? I hope not!
Can you tell us why doesn't this page get indexed by Google?

My intention is not to teach comprehension.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by activeco

My intention is not to teach comprehension.

As I just mentioned above my English is not excellent. What should I understand with this expression?
That you agree, or you disagree?

[janeth]

I said in the beginning that I would spend my time on something else. I don’t think it would make enough difference on smaller sites to do any good. And the time needed to be spent on the larger sites would not be worth the benefit in the long run.

I felt the problem with a lot of people was an understanding of how PR worked. I linked to several articles showing how PR worked and took the side of what Google themselves had said as well as most SEO experts.

But deepsand wanted more and more proof. I am sure he is one of the ones arguing that man never walked on the moon. He helped me remember why I stopped posting on forums.

That’s my two cents.

[Webnauts]

Well after all I created an alternative to the nofollow attribute, assuming after extreme tests that it is the safest way to keep Google out of your business.

I created instead a 301 redirect file with PHP, including there all external links that should not be crawled and followed, disallowed bots to access the redirects file in my robots.txt. and in addition I added in the .htaccess file X-Robots directives "noindex,nofollow" for that redirecting PHP file too.

In addition I have forbidden Google to access the redirect file in my .htaccess with a 403.

The links in the pages are masked in the redirect file, like for example for "http: //www. ratepoint .com" I use on the pages something like "http: //www. seoworkers. com /?m=ratepoint".

What happens is, if the crawlers would suddenly misbehave to the HTTP standards, which they often do, and they access the file, they get a redirect back to my homepage with a 301 redirect. If the visitor clicks on the link, goes to the targeted web site again with a 301 redirect.

I do not use 302 or 307 redirects, since search engines can get aggressive.

I can't remember where I read this, but what I mean it is perfectly posed:

Follow this URL and index the destination page with this URL. I'm not giving full credit to that page and I might change my opinion anytime. So keep my URL with that pages content.

Warning: here lies the problem. If you 302 to an offsite page then you simply claim that pages content. But, as you do not own that site, you will be penalized even banned as this is content theft. So keep the 302s insite.

Another reason for not using temporary redirects was not to have Dangling Pages. It would probably not have been such a big issue, but still it would took longer for Google to sort out where the PR should go.

I thought of sharing these news and I would love to discuss your opinion if I am not going too far off topic.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Just a quick point I'd like to make John.

While it is true that nofollow initially was for links to sites you could not, or did not, want to "vouch" for, that has since evolved.

More simply it's "do not consider this link" with no real definition as to "why" you don't want it followed attached.

As I have said, for my own reasons, I've chosen not to use it for internal links at this point. But I don't believe that anyone who does choose to use it for their own reasons, is somehow attaching a "negative" stigma to the target page.

Dave

Well lets make more clear:

Actually the nofollow attribute tells a search engine "Don't score this link" rather than "Don't follow this link." And my question: For what score?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Well lets make more clear:

Actually the nofollow attribute tells a search engine "Don't score this link" rather than "Don't follow this link." And my question: For what score?

This would mean that any and all links would have a "score" attached to them for every search engine. I don't believe this is the case.

My post was about the fact that there is no negative stigma attached to the attribute. It simply tells any of the SE's that observe the attribute, not to consider the link for whatever they choose to use links for.

Dave

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

This would mean that any and all links would have a "score" attached to them for every search engine. I don't believe this is the case.

My post was about the fact that there is no negative stigma attached to the attribute. It simply tells any of the SE's that observe the attribute, not to consider the link for whatever they choose to use links for.

Dave

Dave can you have a look at this paper http://www2007.org/posters/poster997.pdf and then we discuss this further?