3 ms·
I can't put words in the mouth of the SEO quoted, but (unless you know he was one of the people making removal requests against your site) I suspect he is not t
by will_critchlow 14y ago
I can't put words in the mouth of the SEO quoted, but (unless you know he was one of the people making removal requests against your site) I suspect he is not talking about you or sites like yours.
I should add that I don't agree with the rhetoric btw, but I think he is targeting a different kind of webmaster.
I think he is referring to webmasters who sold links (knowingly outside the guidelines) for years. They would previously have instantly removed the links if someone stopped paying.
As soon as Google stepped up their game and removing those links was important, those same webmasters started charging to take down the same links.
I would personally point to the irony of this (google creating a market that enriches people who have been abusing their system for years) rather than calling it immoral. Ymmv.
Hope that helps clarify some things and I hope I'm not distorting the guy's real meaning.
(written on my phone. Please excuse typos).
- dhimes 14y agoI'm wondering about the graph on Gary's site: what type of business' fortune is linked this tightly to Google's rankings? Is it a particular category, or are there several categories of businesses that suffer from (or leverage) this? That's a pretty frightening situation to be in, IMO.
- will_critchlow 14y agoOh, there are many businesses at least that exposed. I personally wouldn't particularly relish running one, but that's another story...