Calendar
Network
Feeds
Posted By:
Burgo
323 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.martinibuster.net)
Category: Search Marketing
"The moment someone invokes hats, the discussion changes from what does and does not work to what Google does and does not approve of. It narrows the discussion."
4 Comments
Comments
The author says that it should be broken into levels of link building risk. While this is true in a certain respect, in another it's a bit confusing.
For example: I would consider purchasing links to be a higher risk activity nowadays, than the people who break into sites to plant links, and cloak them (NO, I do not do this. I like my exemplary legal status).
Blackhat and whitehat signify more than just the linking methods of choice. They are how sites are built, the mentality of the creator, AND the linking methods.
I definitely agree on that SlightlyShady, and I think Martinibuster would too. Obviously in this article he was dealing primarily with link-building as one facet,
That said, you bring up an interesting point with the link injection; amazing how purchasing links now seems to be a higher risk activity, isn't it?
Apart from the fact that this is neither White nor Black but only Old Hat (dated 10 Aug 2007, duh, and it wasn't even too new then - Greg Boser's been putting it in a similar manner and wording for a year or so before), it's as valid a consideration now as it was then: Discussing colors of hat is simply inane and diversive. SEO was always about risk assessment, ever since the first sites got punished for invisible text and meta tag keyword stuffing in the mid 90s.
As for link infusion, there's plenty of that around even without having to crack someone's server illegally. In terms of riskiness, well, it depends entirely on what you want to achieve with it and how you go about it - a trivial observation, sure, but there's no other set rule to it.
Must... always... look... at... dates. Must not... blindly... trust... feeds...