No, I'm Not Sleeping with Matt Cutts but, I DO Know Google Terms and Conditions

No, I'm Not Sleeping with Matt Cutts but, I DO Know Google Terms and Conditions

I am not insinuating that anyone here IS 'sleeping' with Mr. Cutts but, just thought I'd get your attention with the title!

In recent posts concerning 'link-rings', several items discussed in the original post itself, as well as the comments by the author, need to be clarified for the sake of the readers who believe everything that they read!

First of all, there is a HUGE difference in what is referred to in the post as a 'link ring' and asking someone to contribute to my outside blog or website, which is actually the case referenced erroneously in the original post.

An accurate description of a 'link ring' is this:  "An account would be set up on one of the free platforms. Then depending on the choice of platform, a free blog, lens or page is created and content added to this.  It is best practice to keep the free mini-sites relevant to the main website, in terms of topic, niche and keyword selection.  An advantage would be gained by carefully selecting low-competition, moderately searched keyword phrases to base each mini-site around.

The first mini-site is then linked to the main site.  A link is added from the mini-site to the main site, anchor text links would be best.  Now more mini-sites are created and each is linked to the next. For example, site A is linked to site B, site B is then linked to C, C to D etc.  This process is repeated until the final mini-site is linked back to the original mini-site A.  All the mini-sites should have a link added to the main site. An ideal amount of mini-sites to link would be 5 or 6 to begin with.  You now have a set of mini-sites all linked in a ring - hence the title, Link Ring.  After adding content to a mini-site it would be beneficial to submit each site to a pinging service to let the search engines know they are alive."  Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/4710685

In other words, this is when ONE site owner strategically creates several ‘smaller’ sites linking to one another, not when someone contributes to another’s outside blog or website or has their link on a content-relevant site that belongs to someone else.

To simplify what a whole host of members here in the Rain are doing with their outside blogs and websites, in essence, here what is taking place:  Just as ActiveRain has encouraged us to enlist participation from other members on our outside blogs, making them contributors, linking our sites to and from Localism, linking to our websites on our blogs, linking to our posts via the AR community pages which we purchase, linking to and from our Zillow, Trulia and RealBird accounts (on our side bars), all of which contain our AR blog url as well as our personal website url, so are we doing this outside the Rain.  

Indeed, we are furthermore encouraged to re-blog one another's posts, also linking back to our sites, both blog and websites (as found on our sidebars and our profiles).  This re-blogging technique as described in the original post would be Google-prohibited as 'reciprocal linking' and is, in fact, NOT prohibited but, strongly encouraged.  Their criteria is indeed whether the link is content rich AND relevant.  Again, the subjects are related as is the content relevant, period.  Check websitegrader.com, Google webmaster tools and Google analytics which all rank your site based upon THIS measure (linking from OTHER sites, not your OWN) as well as other important, specific criteria.

The fact that numerous members have added links from one another’s sites to our own sites does not constitute a "link ring."  Rather, this is what is called a “blog roll.”  And yes, we comment on each other’s WordPress posts, as we do in AR and ask one another to contribute particular, informative posts which apply to our clients (relevant content) as well as theirs.  I believe ActiveRain calls this “re-blogging.”

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this practice, nothing whatsoever and you are NOT going to be ‘punished’ by Google for linking to other members sites.  What you are doing here is not at all what is described in the clip or any portion of the original post. 

I'd also like to add that as referenced in the original post, if one of the agents who are contributing to my outside blog or site ever does make me angry enough to ban him/her from posting good, relevant content on my outside blog or for me to have her link on my page, then I'm 100% positive that if I reported him/her to Google, they'd laugh in my face.  In fact, to simplify it even beyond the ActiveRain analogies above, you can associate this practice as ‘liking’ a link to someone’s business page on your own Facebook page; same scenario, just a different platform.
 
Vague, unsubstantiated and unwarranted accusations to and regarding other members made simply because one member has fallen in the SERPS is not healthy in this forum, especially when used as a 'scare tactic.'  I would think time could be better spent, hard at work applying SEO practices to improve ones site instead of attempting to make others look poorly in the eyes of their readers--especially when ActiveRain, the platform the original post was written, condones this very sharing activity in which we're participating.

I feel compelled to defend my and my colleagues’ positions here.  A multitude of ActiveRain members have worked tirelessly, honestly and with the utmost integrity to build their presence in this ever-competitive market, using methods which we have all been taught by the very best, ActiveRain staff and ActiveRain members among them. 

 

Homes for Sale in Charlotte NC

Homes for Sale in Charlotte NC on Facebook

Search Charlotte Homes for Sale

Search Charlotte Neighborhoods

         

   

Disclosure of material contained within.