So that's where by barbs went. I've been looking all over for them.
A one-liner junk-post expounding the intrinsic worth of a non-existent link attribute. Leo, how is this type of post going to help anyone?Originally Posted by leosun
It's been said many times here by both casual posters and veteran members that having both followed and no follow links is the best strategy. Looking for an even balance of both or thinking a one-side strategy in finding just followed links, IMO, is not a "natural" approach in terms of link-building, and is a time-waster.Originally Posted by suhanaanjum
Nofollow or followed - any backlink can increase website traffic.Originally Posted by suhanaanjum
Don't allow sign-ups from free email addresses. Don't allow outbound links in signatures.Originally Posted by charldan
Pot calling kettle black..Originally Posted by evelina007
To quote you from another thread
this ^^ Has been said 10 times already-
I know that from time to time there has been suggestion that Google ignores "nofollow" links and do pass on PR and other metrics, does anyone know if this is the case?
They obviously do not have the same impact as do follow. However, i think it is widely accepted that some no follow back links can be beneficial. For example, if you hit all the social bookmarking sites then you do get results even though the links are virtually all no follow. How the algorithm works is anyone's guess.
There is already a long running thread on this subject here:
one of the recent postings on that thread also points to other threads on this forum that are related.