New way to buy links or scam?

[amxfan]

For some reason I was not able to sleep and found myself bored. In so I decided to check out what was going on in the "internet underground" So I fired up MIRC and started to poke around. I pop into a SEO channel and after awhile a topic caught my eye of someone selling one way links in blocks of 25, 50 and 100. What they where actually doing is selling accounts. In short they would go on "I think related" forums / Blogs and post threads. Once they have gotten X amount of threads they would put a keyworded link in a sig file then sell that account and start all over again. I found this fascinating that someone would actually do this. But it also got me asking myself

Is this the new wave of link buying? or just a scam.

Now I know IRC is not the place that most companies go to get SEO help and most of the people in that channel I would bet where running some what questionable sites but the fact is there where people there and if it gets out could this become the new wave?

[amxfan]

Update

Ok this isn't anything new as I have found out. But come on is this where getting links has taken some people? I would hate to see any type of thread such as this one here on WPW.

http://www.chatlife.co.uk/clforum/f40/bid-im-selling-one-sig-link-t1977/

I mean it is bad enough people spam there site across forums and blogs just to get links. Or as Spiderbait has recently started a thread on "cut and pasting" questions from other forums.
This has to be a new low. I hate to see what comes next.....

[chowell]

Purchasing forum signatures is just another avenue of attempting to get past Google's "paid link" issues. It's really a shame that people go to this level.

Hopefully, the forum links will disappear after time, since the profiles will no longer be actively posting.

I've heard of much larger signature sponsorships, where people will contact the most frequent posters in forums and offer them an amount to get a link in their sig. The only folks who could properly know about these types of sponsorships are Moderators and othe forum members who see frequent sig changes and/or links unrelated to what the forum member has been known to be involved in previously.

[crankydave]

This is really nothing new.

As long as something has value, or percieved to have value, there will always be folks willing to buy and sell it.

Dave

[amxfan]

Originally Posted by crankydave

As long as something has value, or perceived to have value, there will always be folks willing to buy and sell it.

Yes you are correct in that. But like always who is going to pay for this. SE's in general are reactive and once this method hits the mainstream "if it has not already" they will do what they have always done and that's counter it. This I would guess would either devalue the links or penalize one if one has too many links from one source. When does it stop? Even lawyers have morals "although they may be few" as they will not defend some clients. But it seems as more and more web masters do not have any and will do just about anything to try and get their site to the top. Most of the time these sites are not worth a damn to begin with, sadly enough. But the real sad thing is there isn't anything we can do about it. We can preach all day long about black hat SEO, buying and selling links, PR manipulation, etc. and it seems to do no good.

Sorry, but yes this kind of has my feathers ruffled.

I have been asked why am I blaming the webmasters for doing it, when I should be blaming Google for bringing it to the table to begin with, by requiring IBL's and the weight they have. I actually had to stop and think about this for a quick second and the only way I can reply is by stating your boss requires you to be at work on time, but are you going to blame him when the cop gives you the speeding ticket? Or are you going to blame the cop? The truth is, it is your own fault.

[marcel]

Why would it be a scam ?


It's legit. Sounds like a great idea to me. Once the buyer is happy with links like that, why not...

As long as the forum owner is not annoyed with users abandoning their accounts to start new ones.

[amxfan]

Originally Posted by marcel

Why would it be a scam ?


It's legit. Sounds like a great idea to me. Once the buyer is happy with links like that, why not...

As long as the forum owner is not annoyed with users abandoning their accounts to start new ones.

Ok I have calmed down a little....

You think that this is a good idea? Even knowing Google is against the buying and selling of links?
Would you say this could also be looked at as a form of black hat SEO?

I spend most of my time here in the site review area of WPW due to I believe this is where I can do the most good. I also have a great deal of respect for this forum and it's members that contribute to the cause. But why should I? Why should I help someone who needs it just so they can come back and spam the forums that myself and many, many others have spent so much time trying to make better and the place to come for good sound advice?

What you do on your own site is up to you and to be honest I really do not care. But what people do here "including myself" affects me and also affects the other members as WE become a part of it by association. I'm not quite sure how else I can put it other than it all has to do with respect.

Now maybe I'm way out in left field on this and if so thats fine. But in my opinion I think people that abuse the forums should not be allowed to be part of the forums.
Selling sig file links is abuse IMO.

Over 100 people have looked at this thread, and apparently since there have been no replies supporting or opposing this, I am getting the feeling that to many it is okay. I am getting the feeling that I am wasting my time and should just shut up and let it go.

[visio]

Originally Posted by amxfan

Ok I have calmed down a little....

You think that this is a good idea? Even knowing Google is against the buying and selling of links?

yes google is against selling links, because they want to be the only ones doing just that.

[lukkyjay]

It's only a matter of time until the forum software updates include a "rel=nofollow" on sigs. I'm surprised they don't already.

[incrediblehelp]

Buying links is never a good idea any way you look at it. You never have control of the links or what value they will give you, so essentially what are you paying for?

[Terry Van Horne]

Umm... is this abusing a community and not using it for the purposes the community was created or is cool to use a community solely for the purpose of promotion. I don't believe so and doubt the links provide much value since it is quickly buried. This is just another BS scheme brought to you by the wannabe SEOs of the world! IMO, It's well below the level any professional stoops.

[Palindrome]

Originally Posted by amxfan

Over 100 people have looked at this thread, and apparently since there have been no replies supporting or opposing this, I am getting the feeling that to many it is okay. I am getting the feeling that I am wasting my time and should just shut up and let it go.

Hi

I think most rational people would agree with you. Set aside the moral issue and consider the inevitable damage.

Those with genuine, freely given links in forums, or who offer real support in exchange for their links will lose that value. As has been said, search engines will simply clamp down more and more. The road that Google have taken recently is just a start, they wish to return to the dream of links being nothing other than a freely given editorial vote. The fact they will kill a percentage of genuine votes in trying to achieve this, will not stop their pursuit of the impossible. They believe that is best for their real business, advertising.

This particular debate over forum links may not last long anyway, wouldn't be at all surprised if the push behind nofollowing blog posts is continued into forums. If that doesn't work, they simply devalue the lot.

So we should all be concerned, although not too worried about schemes that are likely to be short lived. Bettter to concentrate on replacing what we will lose in the process.

[alexsimon]

Now the thing with spam is not ok.

But buying sigs in relevant forums is not immoral. Forums could counterreact on this and put nofollow tag to the links in the sigs.

It would be ok, since it would not affect the algo, and at the same time, they would (or would not) bring in visitors to those sites.

To clarify myself the only accepted way of this is:

- by buying sigs in relevant topical forums. For example in a travel related forum for a travel site. It does not annoy users.
- by buying them for the visitors that would come through those links and not for the algo (this could be prevented though by forum owners I guess)
- by not buying newly created accounts, and by not supporting the spammy posts these new accounts make.

Spamming forums and then selling the links is not ok, but buying a sig link from a reputable member of a forum, a nofollow sig link maybe, would be acceptable, as people look for what those members have in the sig, and thus they may become prospective visitors of the site that is advertised.

[amxfan]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Buying links is never a good idea any way you look at it. You never have control of the links or what value they will give you, so essentially what are you paying for?

I wish I had a answer to this question but I don't.

@ Terry

People that are here to help do so for free. I look at a sig file as a way the admin of the forum says thanks for your help. If one is only here to promote themselves and not here seeking help or to give help, then they should not be allowed here, never-the-less to have a sig file. I think we both agree on this. As far as no professional SEO would stoop to this. I wish I could agree. Not all professionals use the best tactics to promote their clients as I'm sure you know.


@ Palindrome

Very well put and I agree. We should be expecting something to happen and start planning on it now. With that I also have to wonder if it would be better if they did not add a nofollow to the sig file as I can see some good people leaving due to there would no longer be any incentive to help. I would rather see the forums go to the 'you must post X amount of times before you can have a sig file' or have 'X amount of activity per week to keep their sig file' rule if they must do anything.

I also made that last statement due to I do not understand why anyone who spends alot of time here would not get upset at the mere thought of this. After all this is OUR forum these people are abusing.

@alexsimon

That is your opinion and you have a right to it, but I do not agree with it.
If a member of the forums has a sig file to their site or sites and they are active in the forums then yes that is okay as I feel that is a way of saying thanks for helping. But once the member starts selling their links in that file I feel they have crossed the line as they are no longer there to help the cause but more so to make money. Once money gets involved the members mind set would tend to change and soon they start to think.. hmmm if I had a few accounts, I could make more. And it keeps going down hill from there, bringing the forums down with it.

[chrisJumbo]

I do not believe members should be selling their sig link. Matter of fact, it may even go agaist the terms of service of the forum, if it isn't it should be.

However, one thing to note, the forum signatures I believe are dynamic so if you change your sig links, then when the SEs come and re-index the post, the old sig links will be replace by the new. Can someone verify this?

Thus, if I'm correct, whatever "value" was there would disappear.

I think if you really valued the member's authority you could PM them and they could do a review or something for you. Selling sig links just seems low, low, low.

[amxfan]

chrisJumbo

Thank you I agree 100%
As far the the sig file goes if you have 100 post and you change the sig. it changes it for all 100 post. This is why they were selling the accounts and not just the links I guess.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by visio

yes google is against selling links, because they want to be the only ones doing just that.

False.

Google, like Yahoo and MSN, sells advertising links; they do not sell natural ones. Link selling & buying, of the type frowned on by SEs, is of the latter kind, that which corrupts the organic search results.

[arius]

This has been around at least 9 months or a year. I remember being solicited this service through and old Two-way link builing service provider we used (which of course was looking to compensate for his lost business). I don't like buying link at any capacity so did not act on it, but I know a two sites that ended up using them. One was very happy and i think still use the service (and claims he saw improvements in his SERPs), the other (which is the more credible one I should add) did not continue with the service.

In summary I think if you are ok with the concept of Link Buying (I am not, but I know some are ok with it), and you don't want to wait on getting some additional support on your relatively new site, I guess it is ok to make a part of your package. But putting 50% of your budget in this is no good. I still would not do it. There are a lot more better, honest and smart ways to get links.

[dreras]

Don't do it. Paying for links is never a good idea.

Your only going to be mad at yourself later.

[vwlpaige]

I agree that buying links in the way described is black hat SEO.

Let's not blame Google for the IBL situation. The better target of blame is the guy who tries to game Google and lead searchers to a site having nothing to do with his search - or a site simply filled with Google ads on the topic of the search.

Please remember that one of Google's main aims is to keep the natural search listings worthwhile.

The people who have been among the worst abusers in the various forums with inapplicable links have been the viagra guys and various other pharmaceuticals. Often they use misleading link text which does not help Google or anyone searching on Google.

Let's be practical. Yes, we all want our sites to be found, and if we're practicing white hat SEO, we're playing by Google's rules. Helping Google to maintain an excellent search is in our best interests, because we need the #1 search engine. Plus if Google catches anyone using black hat techniques, the offending site gets dropped.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Buying links is never a good idea any way you look at it. You never have control of the links or what value they will give you, so essentially what are you paying for?

hey incred

what about "link placement programs"..? are you saying that all these companies that buy thousands of links are kidding themselves?

thanks
rick