Example of what not to do in BST

Mike

Mike

New member
Jun 27, 2006
6,777
116
0
51
On the firing line
http://www.wickedfire.com/links-seo...te-hat-seo-2-months-manual-link-building.html

All the potential sellers out there: take note....

If people respond to your thread, they're probably interested in your product.

Rather than crying to a mod (especially me) take a moment to turn off emotion and think: "Are they really just crashing my thread? OR (more likely) are they teetering on the edge of buying?"

99 times out of 100 people aren't going to take the time to post in your shitty sales thread if they don't have at least a modicum of interest.




TL;DR : don't cry to me when you can't sell your shitty service.
 


Happy Thanksgiving!

w1d02f.jpg
 
Didn't realise the no bump rule applied to genuine answers to questions. Makes sense but am happy I saw that before I start any threads...
 
These guys blow my mind. Manual link building is not whitehat and never has been.

Whitehat has always been defined very clearly/simply.

If you're doing anything offpage, or breaking the Google Guidelines onpage, then that's not whitehat.

I doubt Matt Cutts would sign off on this guy's service.

I don't really give a shit what people say when marketing, but when stuff like Penguin happens, my PMs and Skype get swamped with people with real business websites who thought that what they were buying or contracting was risk free with regards to Google penalties, and most of them are suicidal over their destroyed Google traffic profile.

Yeah, caveat emptor however misleading advertising is still misleading advertising.
 
guerilla said:
Whitehat has always been defined very clearly/simply.
Click to expand...

If we are talking about "white hat" in terms of our Google moral overlords, then they might have clear examples of what is not white hat, but I don't think they have 100% clearly defined what is, or if they have, then they contradict themselves.

If you're doing anything offpage
Click to expand...

This would include Pepsi linking to their site from Facebook, or Matt Cutts linking to his from Twitter, LinkedIn, or blog comments he has made.

In the overall computer world, white hat still mostly refers to the hacker variety.
 
if you dont make any sales then your thread or service failed to deliver, better find other place:boid: because wf buyers are too smart!!

inb4 ban hammer already thrown.
 
Moxie said:
If we are talking about "white hat" in terms of our Google moral overlords
Click to expand...
Not a very libertarian attitude from you Moxie. It's their search engine, why shouldn't they be able to dictate the terms of inclusion and ranking?

Moxie said:
then they might have clear examples of what is not white hat, but I don't think they have 100% clearly defined what is, or if they have, then they contradict themselves.
Click to expand...
Go through the Links and SEO services marked white hat, and ask yourself, would Matt Cutts approve?

End of story.

Even if whitehat describes an unattainable mythical SEO model, it's bullshit to call your service whitehat when it is not.

Moxie said:
This would include Pepsi linking to their site from Facebook, or Matt Cutts linking to his from Twitter, LinkedIn, or blog comments he has made.
Click to expand...
That's authorship.

Moxie said:
In the overall computer world, white hat still mostly refers to the hacker variety.
Click to expand...
I try to stick to topics I know something about. I'd like to think SEO is in that small group.
 
guerilla said:
Not a very libertarian attitude from you Moxie. It's their search engine, why shouldn't they be able to dictate the terms of inclusion and ranking?
Click to expand...

I wasn't commenting on Google being able to do whatever they want, I was referring to the SEO world using terms with moral connotations that get defined based on what Google deems appropriate.

White and black hat came out of the movie world, where the heroes and villains would wear those color hats. I don't care if anyone here wants to label themselves as grey or black hat any more than if they want to call themselves a "gangster", but at the same time if a mommy blogger wants to leave blog comments all day long, it's not like there is a line that can be crossed where the mere act of doing that can suddenly transform her into an immoral person.

Go through the Links and SEO services marked white hat, and ask yourself, would Matt Cutts approve?
Click to expand...

Right, I would agree that most services shouldn't use the term because it can mislead people, but what I was getting at is that the term is misleading to begin with.

On a similar note :

Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)

“Piracy”

Publishers often refer to copying they don't approve of as “piracy.” In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions more complete.)

If you don't believe that copying not approved by the publisher is just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word “piracy” to describe it. Neutral terms such as “unauthorized copying” (or “prohibited copying” for the situation where it is illegal) are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as “sharing information with your neighbor.”

That's authorship.
Click to expand...

Call it what you want, but it is being done offpage and involves linking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom