is outgoing links weakening me ?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

janeth did you read my first post?



When you refer to PR leaking through outbound links i think youre thinking of it being something like the hole in the titanic!

It would depend on the number of outbound links to fully understand the damage that could be done.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

No Janeth - you have yet to disprove anything - you find one site - just one with authoritive links in and out that is not doing well in SERP - you contradict yourself - over and over again - it reads like 'Do as I say - not as I do'. You link out - how's your SERP????

The question the original poster asked was can outbound links hurt me.

I answered that and was correct in my answer. You answered that was incorrect in your answer.

Outbound links can hurt you. Not only can they hurt you but they can get your site banned.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by the len

2 questions:

1. does having a page with a lot of outgoing links weaken my site?
2. if i have reciprocal links with sites of my industry, is it worth something for ranking or does google ignore it?

Here where the questions.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Well I think you will find that Phil Craven had a few problems with a certain Michael Martinez over that post and the questions he raised were never replied to. Linking to authoritive sites is excellent SEO.

Can you prove any of that?

[kgun]

Back to square one: Do All "Bad" OBL's Hurt You?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

That it is easy to dominate the SERP's with a non competitive KW in the anchor text of an IBL. It has even been observed / claimed that semantic links with relevant anchor text can outrank on site content.

Since the KW was non competitive, it would not hurt his site, but may be his ego.

P.S. If I linked to a site with a word that was only only found in that anchor text, the target would naturally get SERP postion # 1 for that word.

If you linked to a site and was the only one using that keyword out of the whole internet or had very little competition then of course. Or had a very strong site you were doing the linking with.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

Back to square one: Do All "Bad" OBL's Hurt You?

The question was rather all OBL's hurt you and the answer is yes.

Rather the good out weighs the bad was not the question and would take some testing.

[kgun]

It need not be strong if Google index the content (find the word).

is outgoing links weakening me ?

I do not see fundamentally new arguments in this thread that was not discussed in the one I cited above.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by janeth

The question was rather all OBL's hurt you and the answer is yes.

Rather the good out weighs the bad was not the question and would take some testing.

That was the original question but the discussion has developed since then. You claimed that you add nofollow to all outbound links and that statement created the majority of the conversation since? If everyone nofollowed all their outbound links to stop "PR leak" then where would be? That is bad advice for all concerned!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

It need not be strong if Google index the content (find the word).

is outgoing links weakening me ?

I do not see fundamentally new arguments in this thread that was not discussed in the one I cited above.

I've not spent the time to go to the one that was cited. But will do so now. And I didn't look but I believe the site in question belongs to a very well know person.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

That was the original question but the discussion has developed since then. You claimed that you add nofollow to all outbound links and that statement created the majority of the conversation since? If everyone nofollowed all their outbound links to stop "PR leak" then where would be? That is bad advice for all concerned!

I did not say that I add outbound links to all my links. I said if you wanted to link out and did not want to loose PR juice you could use outbound links.

But please do tell why that is such bad advice. I'm no SEO expert nor do I do it for a living like yourself so please explain more.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by the len

2 questions:

1. does having a page with a lot of outgoing links weaken my site?
2. if i have reciprocal links with sites of my industry, is it worth something for ranking or does google ignore it?

thanks

lenny

1. It *may*. There's a whole lot of factors to take into consideration and many/most have already been mentioned. If you only link out where and when appropriate for the sake of your visitors you'll generally be fine. Linking out to try and create some sort of "value" for yourself for the SE's benefit is not something I'd recommend.

2. Depends. Nothing wrong with good reciprocal links when and where appropriate. It may or may not be discounted. Again, if you link with your visitors in mind then any *value* you may receive from a SE is simply a bonus.

@kgun... There is some information/studies out there about users not liking links that open in a new window. However, most of what I've seen or read is prior to the more widespread use of tabbed browsing so I'm not sure if the same holds true today.

Dave

[inertia]

Originally Posted by janeth

I would link out to the sites that I felt would benefit my customers but would use a nofollow tag to keep from giving them PR.

So you dont follow your own advice? If we all nofollowed outbound links to preserve PR then the whole PR concept would be useless. We shouldnt encourage people to use nofollows IMO.

Im no "SEO expert" either, more an "up and coming SEO apprentice". But i do have a logical thinking and logically nofollowing relevant outbound links does not make sense (unless they are paid or un-checked by the webmaster).

[kgun]

Originally Posted by crankydave

@kgun... There is some information/studies out there about users not liking links that open in a new window. However, most of what I've seen or read is prior to the more widespread use of tabbed browsing so I'm not sure if the same holds true today.

Hopefully not, since I use it much on my sites when I find it relevant. It is also easy to give the surfer and option (check box) to check if (s)he prefer either way.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

So you dont follow your own advice? If we all nofollowed outbound links to preserve PR then the whole PR concept would be useless. We shouldnt encourage people to use nofollows IMO.

It depends on what I'm doing as to rather I use nofollow tags or not. And since the safest bet is to use them the correct advice is what I gave.

You feel that if everyone starts using nofollow tags then PR would be useless. Maybe you should take your case up with Google since Google encourages people to use it.

But your argument is really lacking.

Originally Posted by inertia

Im no "SEO expert" either, more an "up and coming SEO apprentice". But i do have a logical thinking and logically nofollowing relevant outbound links does not make sense (unless they are paid or un-checked by the webmaster).

If you are talking with someone and have no idea of what they know or do not know, telling them to use a nofollow tag on all outgoing links is good advice.

Bad advice is telling them not to use it.

Have you checked the sites he is linking to or do you know the number of outbound links he will be using on that page?

Do you know the number of internal links that he will be linking to from that page?

Do you know for what keywords he is trying to rank or how the links are set up on hist site?

And if you are charging someone for doing SEO work and giving SEO advice on forums then I'd say you no longer consider yourself an apprentice.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

Hopefully not, since I use it much on my sites when I find it relevant. It is also easy to give the surfer and option (check box) to check if (s)he prefer either way.

I hate when I'm reading advice on a blog and click a link they link to for more information and it opens in the same page. Many times I've not finished with the first site yet.

I think all outbound links should open in a new window.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by janeth

I think all outbound links should open in a new window.

I disagree.

Example: Meta Search Engine and search resources: SurfToolbar.com

1. Click "start" on the toolbar and "submenus" of that option.
2. Then click on the other options and submenus.
3. Do you see a semantic reason why I disagree?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

I disagree.

Example: Meta Search Engine and search resources: SurfToolbar.com

1. Click "start" on the toolbar and "submenus" of that option.
2. Then click on the other options and submenus.
3. Do you see a semantic reason why I disagree?

That would be different as the two sites are linking back and fourth to each other.

But I guess there are cases where it would not be a good idea.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by janeth

And if you are charging someone for doing SEO work and giving SEO advice on forums then I'd say you no longer consider yourself an apprentice.

I give advice when i have an opinion or experience on the matter. You know as well as I do that i start lots of threads on this forum; in an effort to learn and progress. So my activity on here would suggest that i am still a rookie. I work for a general marketing company and I... god damn it why am i explaining myself?!

Originally Posted by janeth

If you are talking with someone and have no idea of what they know or do not know, telling them to use a nofollow tag on all outgoing links is good advice.

Bad advice is telling them not to use it.

Why not tell him, erm:

• Only link out to relevant sites

Whats wrong with that?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by kgun

Hopefully not, since I use it much on my sites when I find it relevant. It is also easy to give the surfer and option (check box) to check if (s)he prefer either way.

I do too kgun. Just like most things, I think there appropriate times to do it. A link to copyright info or a chart or graph within the context of an article might be an appropriate time to open in a new window. Links to the citations at the end of an article may be better served by not opening in a new window.

@inertia... Aren't blogger and wordpress blogs all nofollow by default? Also, I'm of the belief that if you're going to allow a link on your own site, you ought to be checking them. Granted, in some instances it's easier said than done. As far as encouraging or discouraging the use of nofollow, here's a hypothetical example...

A page has 50% internal links and 50% external links. All the external links are good relevant resources for the visitor. Now because 50% of the PR ("juice") is being passed "externally" and therefore some of the deeper pages within the actual site are now not getting indexed and or ranking well would you recommend a nofollow? Removing the links? Something else?

Dave

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

I... god damn it why am i explaining myself?!

Originally Posted by inertia

Why not tell him, erm:

• Only link out to relevant sites

Whats wrong with that?

nofollow tags allow you to control the way link juice flows through your site. By using the nofollow tag you're able to send more juice to your external pages and none to sites that could be your competition.

Since most of those sites are not linking back, why should he give them link juice that could be used on his own internal pages?

Matt Cutts said

"The nofollow attribute is just a mechanism that gives webmasters the ability to modify PageRank flow at link-level."

Why not use it to control the flow of juice on your site?

Done correctly you can increase the ranking of different pages on your site.

You should feel free to use nofollow for all links you don’t want to receive link juice.

additional navigation

links to RSS feeds

affiliate stuff

By controlling the PR on our own sites and controlling the PR we are sending out of our site we can increase out sites ranking.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by crankydave

A page has 50% internal links and 50% external links. All the external links are good relevant resources for the visitor. Now because 50% of the PR ("juice") is being passed "externally" and therefore some of the deeper pages within the actual site are now not getting indexed and or ranking well would you recommend a nofollow? Removing the links? Something else?

Dave

I want to make sure I understand. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I have a site about motor bikes with lots of articles. I link out to other motor bike sites that also have lots of articles.

My links are causing their pages to outrank my own. As I'm going broke and watching the other site owners buy new cars and houses (that are a direct affect of my passing PR to their articles and causing them to outrank my own) Should I add the nofollow tag and direct that lost juice back into my own site and in affect cause my articles to outrank there’s and allow myself to buy a new house.

Of course not, it would ruin the internet and stop the flow of the PR juice.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by janeth

nofollow tags allow you to control the way link juice flows through your site. By using the nofollow tag you're able to send more juice to your external pages and none to sites that could be your competition.

Who links to there competition?

I use nofollow on internal links to login, shopping cart pages etc but not much else. So i may sound a little hypocritical but the nofollowing that were talking about is on external links. People adding them to safe guard their own PR is fundamentally wrong and i see it being beneficial for the reasons already stated. If you cited it then give it some PR, its not goin to hurt.

@dave. Yep they are nofollow by default and thats a shame coz i think (and correct me if im wrong) most bloggers dont know or care what the nofollow attribute is all about so they leave it. I think it would be better off by default.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

Who links to there competition?

I do and how do you know the above poster is not.

Originally Posted by inertia

I use nofollow on internal links to login, shopping cart pages etc but not much else. So i may sound a little hypocritical but the nofollowing that were talking about is on external links. People adding them to safe guard their own PR is fundamentally wrong

And why is that?

Whose making up these rules?

Originally Posted by inertia

and i see it being beneficial for the reasons already stated. If you cited it then give it some PR, its not goin to hurt.

It could and it does. What part of links leaking PR do you not understand?

Originally Posted by inertia

@dave. Yep they are nofollow by default and thats a shame coz i think (and correct me if im wrong) most bloggers dont know or care what the nofollow attribute is all about so they leave it. I think it would be better off by default.

And most bloggers can't tell a spam post from a regular post and if it was off by default there would be a ton more people spamming the blog comment sections.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by janeth

I do and how do you know the above poster is not.

Why would you do that?

Originally Posted by janeth

And why is that?
Whose making up these rules?

Its the way the internet works. If every webmaster was you there would be no PR and the whole system that google created would be useless.

Originally Posted by janeth

It could and it does. What part of links leaking PR do you not understand?

I know PR flows but what im saying is it doesnt leak anywhere near enough for you to nofollow the link and discount it from your external link profile - which we have already established is beneficial to your SEO efforts. Look at the many links that have been provided from myself and others to reputable sources claiming this.

Originally Posted by janeth

And most bloggers can't tell a spam post from a regular post and if it was off by default there would be a ton more people spamming the blog comment sections.

Instead those people focus on the few hundred blogs that have turned the nofollow off and forums. We'd be better off having 1000 spammers hitting 1,000,000 sites than 1000 spammers hitting 1000 sites, if you see what i mean?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

Why would you do that?

Because some of them are my friends and others I wanted to help.

Originally Posted by inertia

Its the way the internet works. If every webmaster was you there would be no PR and the whole system that google created would be useless.

And you're here to protect Google?

I'm sure Google will give you a cookie.

Originally Posted by inertia

I know PR flows but what im saying is it doesnt leak anywhere near enough for you to nofollow the link and discount it from your external link profile

How do you know this?

No one, No one, No one, other than Google knows the amount of juice each link is sending out. Without that information you have no idea how much damage is being done.

Originally Posted by inertia

- which we have already established is beneficial to your SEO efforts. Look at the many links that have been provided from myself and others to reputable sources claiming this.

You've established nothing. How can you establish something that no one knows.

Originally Posted by inertia

Instead those people focus on the few hundred blogs that have turned the nofollow off and forums. We'd be better off having 1000 spammers hitting 1,000,000 sites than 1000 spammers hitting 1000 sites, if you see what i mean?

They are bots, they hit all the sites and could careless about the nofollow tag.

[crankydave]

lol @ Janeth... That's one possibility. It's also possible that if you pass too much "juice" externally that some of your own pages suffer and slip into the supposedly nonexistant supplemental index and cause them not to rank as well as they might.

@ inertia... I don't disagree that it should be "off" by default however, the fact that it isn't is more or less "promoting" the idea of nofollow don't you think? And since Blogger is a Google property aren't they promoting it as well?

Dave

[janeth]

Originally Posted by crankydave

lol @ Janeth... That's one possibility. It's also possible that if you pass too much "juice" externally that some of your own pages suffer and slip into the supposedly nonexistant supplemental index and cause them not to rank as well as they might.

Or you link to someone that is not your competition site A and they link to your competition Site B and the PR that you pass to site A passes that PR to site B. And then you drop because of the lost PR from the link you passed and the competition rises from the PR you lost.

Originally Posted by crankydave

@ inertia... I don't disagree that it should be "off" by default

Dave

Nofollow Tags Are Good For the Internet

With dynamic publishing technology improving and more and more people launching blogs daily having the ability to control who is and who is not getting the juice from links is a good thing.

Wordpress coming with the nofollow tags already in the comment sections prevents unknowing bloggers from passing PR juice to spammers helps everyone. If it was not the case more and more people would be using bots to make spam comments and be beating out the legitimate sites in the search results.

[inertia]

Dont you think its a bit odd linking to your competition coz theyre your friends but nofollowing that link? You dont mind loosing your visitors to your competitors but you want to keep the small amount of PR?

I'm sure Google will give you a cookie.

Don't patronize me. Im sticking up for the page rank because it makes search results better does it not? Would you prefer to go back to content based results?

Ive read all the evidence which has been posted and i think linking out is a good thing to do. You think it does jack. That part of the discussion will not be resolved.

Fair enough about the blog spammers.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by crankydave

@ inertia... I don't disagree that it should be "off" by default however, the fact that it isn't is more or less "promoting" the idea of nofollow don't you think? And since Blogger is a Google property aren't they promoting it as well?

Dave

Point noted. I think its kind of counter productive on their part. If we added nofollow to all external links by default, they'd be screwed.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

Dont you think its a bit odd linking to your competition coz theyre your friends but nofollowing that link? You dont mind loosing your visitors to your competitors but you want to keep the small amount of PR?

I don't nofollow the links. As a matter of fact there are only a couple links on my whole site that are nofollowed.

I've told you this lots of times but you just don't seem to get it.

Originally Posted by inertia

Don't patronize me. Im sticking up for the page rank because it makes search results better does it not? Would you prefer to go back to content based results?

lol,

It will never go back to content, it can't go back to content.

Originally Posted by inertia

Ive read all the evidence which has been posted and i think linking out is a good thing to do. You think it does jack. That part of the discussion will not be resolved.

I don't know what doing jack is but I do know that I didn't have to read the information being posted.

I tested it for myself and know what the results can be.

I don't believe anything I read, or, for that matter, anything I hear, unless it is consistent with what I already know to be true, or unless I've taken the time to research the matter to prove its accuracy to my satisfaction. This is known as "doing your homework."

I've been making my living online for a long time. And I make my total living off the sites I build. No cold calling or anything else.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

Ive read all the evidence

Let me take a look at what has been posted

Arguments for linking out to other sites:

1. You tend to get more links coming back in (evidence)
Most people have no idea rather you have used the nofollow tag or not.

It would work regardless of rather you use it or not.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


2. Your domain and pages appear in the referral analytics of other sites, inviting site owners (who are often very likely "linkerati") to check out your site

And you will appear in the same spot even if you use the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


3. The search engines have at least looked into algorithms that reward external linking behavior (like HITS)

Looking into stuff does not mean it affects your ranking. But I would say you would be rewarded more for the nofollow tag than the non use of the nonfollow tag

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


4. Karma - and not just the invisible, metaphysical kind - bloggers really do look at who links out and who doesn't and they tend to reward the more generous

Again, the only people that understand the nofollow tag are SEO’s. Most people in the real world do not have a clue about it. If it will work without it, it will work with it.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


5. In any type of "neighborhood" link analysis model, a site's outlinks can be used as a good predictor of a domain's relative trustworthiness

Does not have anything to do with ranking in the major search engines and really have no idea what it would be used for but it would work Works with or without the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


6. Readers and web visitors can derive value from the links you point to, and they can help to prop up the credibility & association of your own site. Note this research about memory association & repetition (and apply it to the marketing world rather than the political)

Works with or without the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


7. Sites that don't link out are extreme outliers on the web's link graph and thus, may fall more easily into negative classification schemes (particularly if they're run by overzealous, over-optimizing SEOs)

A lot of things might happen in life, although your more likely to get hit by lighting.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.


8. Never linking out doesn't keep visitors on your site any longer, it simply means they'll jump away via the back button, bookmarks, a browser close, or a typed-in address

This has nothing to do with nofollow tags.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

And the really sad part is that the article you guys used for the proof has nothing to do with using the nofollow tag.

The name is Nailing the Coffin Shut on the "Don't Link to External Sites" Philosophy

It has nothing to do with nofollow tags and everything it talks about will work with or without the nofollow tag. Yet it convinced you that nofollow tags were bad.

I'm amazed.

And even more amazed that a mod. used this for proof.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by janeth

Maybe you should start by reading this

Pagerank Explained. Google's PageRank and how to make the most of it.

Now, I wonder, have you read it yourself?

More info here:

1. Google PageRank - Introduction
2. How Google crawls my site

Can you explain exactly what rel="nofollow" does?

Since so few know the attribute, can it end up as a sort of segregation?

[inertia]

1. You tend to get more links coming back in (evidence)
Most people have no idea rather you have used the nofollow tag or not.

It would work regardless of rather you use it or not.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag except for people, and there are some, who know you arent passing link juice and dont feel obliged to link.


2. Your domain and pages appear in the referral analytics of other sites, inviting site owners (who are often very likely "linkerati") to check out your site

And you will appear in the same spot even if you use the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag. Agreed


3. The search engines have at least looked into algorithms that reward external linking behavior (like HITS)

Looking into stuff does not mean it affects your ranking. But I would say you would be rewarded more for the nofollow tag than the non use of the nonfollow tag

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

I makes sense in my mind and it has everything to do with the nofollow tag where google is concerned. The link is completely disregarded in googles link profile. Why would they reward you for using nofollow? Looks like your selling or cant vouch for your links.

The spiders follow the link and find relevant content to your site and visitors, which equals valuable resources for your visitor, which equals trust and topical relation, which (if the other site is linking well) puts you within a network of relevant sites, all equaling in a high level of relevant content and resources associated with your site.


4. Karma - and not just the invisible, metaphysical kind - bloggers really do look at who links out and who doesn't and they tend to reward the more generous

Again, the only people that understand the nofollow tag are SEO’s. Most people in the real world do not have a clue about it. If it will work without it, it will work with it.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

OK, nothing to do with nofollow but you are still alienating the ones who do know, without it you alienate no-one.


5. In any type of "neighborhood" link analysis model, a site's outlinks can be used as a good predictor of a domain's relative trustworthiness

Does not have anything to do with ranking in the major search engines and really have no idea what it would be used for but it would work Works with or without the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

Answered above.


6. Readers and web visitors can derive value from the links you point to, and they can help to prop up the credibility & association of your own site. Note this research about memory association & repetition (and apply it to the marketing world rather than the political)

Works with or without the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag. Agreed.


7. Sites that don't link out are extreme outliers on the web's link graph and thus, may fall more easily into negative classification schemes (particularly if they're run by overzealous, over-optimizing SEOs)

A lot of things might happen in life, although your more likely to get hit by lighting.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

Your opinion, same answer as above from me.


8. Never linking out doesn't keep visitors on your site any longer, it simply means they'll jump away via the back button, bookmarks, a browser close, or a typed-in address

This has nothing to do with nofollow tags.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag. Agreed.

And the really sad part is that the article you guys used for the proof has nothing to do with using the nofollow tag.

The name is Nailing the Coffin Shut on the "Don't Link to External Sites" Philosophy

It has nothing to do with nofollow tags and everything it talks about will work with or without the nofollow tag. Yet it convinced you that nofollow tags were bad.

I'm amazed.

And even more amazed that a mod. used this for proof.

As you can see not all of these points are nofollow matters but some are and i would class them as more important in ranking than the tiny page rank leak that your talking about. From my experience i have never seen anything but good things happen to sites with plenty of resources. I provide valuable resources for my clients site visitors and i want google to know.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

Now, I wonder, have you read it yourself?

Yes

Originally Posted by kgun

Can you explain exactly what rel="nofollow" does?

Since so few know the attribute, can it end up as a sort of segregation?

It's nothing more than a tag that tells Google, Yahoo, MSN, and other search engines not to consider the link in their ranking system.

Because Google has forced it on so many sites it could never be segregated.

[inertia]

From my experimenting, google completely disregards the link. Yahoo doesnt. MSN does.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by janeth

It's nothing more than a tag that tells Google, Yahoo, MSN, and other search engines not to consider the link in their ranking system.

It is an attribute and not a tag. There is a great difference between a tag and an attribute in the W3C DOM standard, the core standard for hyper linked documents.

Originally Posted by janeth

Because Google has forced it on so many sites it could never be segregated.

My bolding.

Aside from Blogger sites, which?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

1. Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag except for people, and there are some, who know you arent passing link juice and dont feel obliged to link.

In the SEO industry only.


2. Good

Originally Posted by inertia

3. [COLOR=red]I makes sense in my mind and it has everything to do with the nofollow tag where google is concerned. The link is completely disregarded in googles link profile. Why would they reward you for using nofollow? Looks like your selling or cant vouch for your links.

The spiders follow the link and find relevant content to your site and visitors, which equals valuable resources for your visitor, which equals trust and topical relation, which (if the other site is linking well) puts you within a network of relevant sites, all equaling in a high level of relevant content and resources associated with your site.

I want debate something that Google is not even using. And since Google is not even using it how the Hell do you know how it works.

IT'S NOT BEING USED. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT YOU OR I THINK.

Originally Posted by inertia

4. Karma - and not just the invisible, metaphysical kind - bloggers really do look at who links out and who doesn't and they tend to reward the more generous

Again, the only people that understand the nofollow tag are SEO’s. Most people in the real world do not have a clue about it. If it will work without it, it will work with it.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

OK, nothing to do with nofollow but you are still alienating the ones who do know, without it you alienate no-one.

We agree it has nothing to do with the nofollow tag. I know all about the nofollow tag but have never looked to see who uses it and who does not.

Originally Posted by inertia

5. In any type of "neighborhood" link analysis model, a site's outlinks can be used as a good predictor of a domain's relative trustworthiness

Does not have anything to do with ranking in the major search engines and really have no idea what it would be used for but it would work Works with or without the nofollow tag.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

Answered above.

Answered what above. Your answering questions that you have no way of answering. Therefore you can not be correct.

Originally Posted by inertia

6. Agreed.

Good

Originally Posted by inertia

7. Sites that don't link out are extreme outliers on the web's link graph and thus, may fall more easily into negative classification schemes (particularly if they're run by overzealous, over-optimizing SEOs)

A lot of things might happen in life, although your more likely to get hit by lighting.

Has nothing to do with the nofollow tag nor is it talking about the nofollow tag.

Your opinion, same answer as above from me.

Again you are trying to debate something that does not exist.

Originally Posted by inertia

8. Agreed.

Good

Originally Posted by inertia

As you can see not all of these points are nofollow matters but some are and i would class them as more important in ranking than the tiny page rank leak that your talking about. From my experience i have never seen anything but good things happen to sites with plenty of resources. I provide valuable resources for my clients site visitors and i want google to know.

Your are trying to claim that something the author himself says has nothing to do with getting ranked in Google is more important than the most important thing in getting ranked in Google?

PR and the way it is used is the single most important factor in getting a site ranked.

[inertia]

Its about relevance and trust not pr. These are huge factors in ranking. Bigger than the minimal pr leak youre talking about.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

This Is About Relevance And Trust, Not Pr! The Pr Leak From An

The topic continues to change.

Now you are trying to say that by linking out it builds trust and this trust helps you rank?

[kevsta]

lol @ this thread.

it massively depends on how many links offsite you are talking about, and to who.

in another thread on here a few days ago I advised a noob to be thinking about nofollowing some if not all of the 7 (out of a total 12) links to other sites from his PR1 homepage if he wanted his inner pages to rank better.

the sites he's linking to could be considered relevant. they could also be considered competitors. average PR3.

im curious who here disagrees with that advice?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by inertia

Its about relevance and trust not pr. These are huge factors in ranking. Bigger than the minimal pr leak youre talking about.

Are you making this up as you go along.

First you have no way of measuring the PR leakage. So how would you know how big it is or is not.

Second can you show me some proof that the sites you link to builds trust and that trust is used some where in Google's algo?

And carries more weight than PR.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kevsta

lol @ this thread.

it massively depends on how many links offsite you are talking about, and to who.

in another thread on here a few days ago I advised a noob to be thinking about nofollowing some if not all of the 7 (out of a total 12) links to other sites from his PR1 homepage if he wanted his inner pages to rank better.

the sites he's linking to could be considered relevant. they could also be considered competitors. average PR3.

im curious who here disagrees with that advice?

I agree 100% with it.

[kevsta]

lol i know you do Janeth we sing from the same hymn sheet. I should have phrased that as "who here apart from Janeth..."

seriously is anyone actually going to disagree with that advice?

heavy use of nofollow will not (currently) hurt your rankings, I don't state much as fact, but i will that.

happy to provide examples.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kevsta

lol i know you do Janeth we sing from the same hymn sheet. I should have phrased that as "who here apart from Janeth..."

seriously is anyone actually going to disagree with that advice?

heavy use of nofollow will not (currently) hurt your rankings, I don't state much as fact, but i will that.

happy to provide examples.

It's sad the lack of knowledge from people who are doing SEO work on other people's sites and charging them money for it.

The original poster said

does having a page with a lot of outgoing links weaken my site?

Notice the words a lot.

I said yes and then the SEO experts wanted to debate the whole link juice thing thing that Matt Cutts has already confirmed.

Its obvious that PR is passed through links or why would we all try and build the damn things but as far as outbound links being "holes in a bucket" then I'm not buying it.

The the original poster asked this question

would you reccomend to avoid it?
even if i miss incoming links?
or should i put outgoing links only if the other site links back?

I posted the simple answer, not knowing how many outbound links, only that there was a lot. Nofollow the links.

You'd thought I'd talked bad about Obama after that one. People throwing links at me and saying things like

That is bad advice for all concerned!

When it calmed down I went back and looked at all these articles and none of them had to do with nofollow tags.

That seemed to upset the SEO experts. The articles were to prove their pointing and reading them would so their ignorance of not knowing what the article was about, so they turned around and said it is no longer about link leakage or the nofollow tag.

"It's all about trust. And linking out to sites build trust and that is worth more than incoming links PR or anything else. "

I guess they take pride in being ignorant.

[kgun]

So now SEO is also about the optimal use of the rel="nofollow" attribute.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

So now SEO is also about the optimal use of the rel="nofollow" attribute.

It would really depend on the site. Most sites would not benefit from it at all.

Where a really large site or a site with lots of internal and external links might.

[kevsta]

Originally Posted by kgun

So now SEO is also about the optimal use of the rel="nofollow" attribute.

i don't see a question mark? is this a statement?

IMO in a lot of cases, rightly or wrongly, it is a factor, yes.

edit, lol @ woopra lighting up, this is obviously contraversial stuff.

[janeth]

The trust theory

About a year or so ago a lot of the SEO’s thought that placing a couple outbound links on their site with relevant anchor text and linking to high PR sites would somehow give them a boost in the rankings.

It was talked about on several forums and stated in many places as fact. And lots and lots of people followed along and started linking out like crazy.

After several months and not seeing any change the whole thing was laid to rest. As far as I know Google never used anything like this in their ranking and all the SEO’s stopped talking about it.

And if you look around you can find people that dropped in ranking from doing this.

Not sure who started the whole thing and I’m sure that person does not want to take credit for it either.

And it’s why it’s so important to test things and not take everything you hear or read as fact.

[chiron]

I tend to use the "test for yourself" strategy frequently. Things change, SEs shuffle, and truth is often simplified or intentionally manipulated.

Here's a fairly decent test case.

I have a PR 5 linking to two sites that were created and juiced at the same time (some years ago).

The recipient home page PR is thus: 4 and 3.

The recipients each have one IBL of note.

One site has a single OBL (no rel=nofollow) and one site has no OBLs.

The one with the OBL is the 3, no OBL is the 4.

It's not quite a perfect test, but it is indicative if not the last word on the matter.