What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
59 Comments
- Takayama, on 11/09/2007, -5/+39Basically, nofollow is like two years old. This information has been around the SEO/Webmaster-Scene for years.
- ikamos, on 11/08/2007, -1/+11I'm thinking, "WTF is this doing on the front page?" So I check on who submitted this crap and see that they're mutual friends with supernova17 (top digger). Ughh...
- darnit, on 11/08/2007, -6/+15buried as nofollow is as old as dirt and *very* common knowledge amongst SEOers.
For those interested here is a useful plug-in that highlights nofollow links if you are doing link building for SEO purposes. (as well as a ton of other usefull things for SEO development.)
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/321 - TyroPyro, on 11/08/2007, -0/+9W3C Markup Validation Service
This page is not Valid -//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en!
Result: Failed validation, 12444 Errors
haha - inactive, on 11/08/2007, -0/+7It's an attribute, not a tag.
- Goblinkiller, on 11/08/2007, -2/+9It isn't nofollow that is the news here as far as I understood - it's how Google wants you to use it! That they're starting to expect nofollows on webpage is news to me at least...
- riorio, on 11/08/2007, -3/+9Yes, this is old news. For example, Wikipedia has been using it for several years as a mean to prevent link spam.
- darnit, on 11/08/2007, -0/+5Its a direct result of their most recent crackdown on link sellers from high PR sites. Basically many were penalized for using their PR as a proposition to sell expensive and often unrelated backlinks to other sites in the hopes of transfering that G love down stream. The sites engaging in this practice got rightfully ***** and I have serious doubts about the benefit the buyers received as well (at least within the last year or so). It was an old trick that ran it's course imho...
- jaygee, on 11/08/2007, -0/+5Did Google just buy Digg for 300 Million? Why is this on the front page?
- silence7, on 11/08/2007, -0/+5The big to do about nofollow tags is not that it's new, it's all about the recent Google update that dropped the pagerank of some pretty big players' websites. Seemingly the reason their pagerank was dropped was because of all the links on their pages. If they'd used nofollow tags on the majority of the links they wouldn't have dropped rank. Google was seeing these pages as link farms, albeit small ones.
There was a very interesting conversation about it on search engine guide, I'm not affiliated with them in any way, but I do subscribe to their newsletter....
http://www.searchengineguide.com/robert-clough/sea ... - formergthing, on 11/14/2007, -2/+6Welcome to nearly 3 years ago!
- maxyRO, on 11/08/2007, -2/+6wtf? this is not something new at all. nofollow has been around for more than a couple of years.
- dtele, on 11/11/2007, -9/+13VERY useful for web developers.
- Goblinkiller, on 11/08/2007, -2/+6They are asking you to add semantic-data to help Google determine which links are purchased or in another way shouldn't be counted. That is not the same as telling you that you must use them - but if you don't Google have to guess and they may not guess in your favor.
- str3ama, on 11/08/2007, -0/+3this article actually talks about the recent pagerank drop that some users who possibly engaged in paid link schemes endured, so it's somewhat recent. But it's common knowledge to most diggers, and the quality of information in the post is very poor....this really shouldn't be on the frontpage, it's nothing more then a splog. Especially since the site is an "Internet Marketting Firm"
- Dokument, on 11/08/2007, -1/+4esp this website
http://havenworks.com/ - ikamos, on 11/08/2007, -0/+3Are you an idiot? Find out at: http://youaredumb.com/
- subramanyam86, on 11/08/2007, -2/+5wtf ?
- Takayama, on 11/08/2007, -0/+3Basically, nope. Google representatives clearly stated right from the beginning what they expect nofollow to be used for. See (2006) http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/quick-comment-on-nof ... or (2005) http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/01/preventing- ... . In Google's eyes, it is irrelevant if a link us user-added (as in blog comment spam) or put in by the sites owner, it wants to see nofollow if the link was not set altruistically.
- formergthing, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2I'm sure by years you mean months.
Well, they did have nofollow's for a short time in 2005, but they've been no-follow free for a few years until just recently. - paromi3, on 11/08/2007, -3/+5old stuff
- GTPilot, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2who said they are making rules? it's like robots.txt except for links. no one has to use it and it's just an optional way for a site owner to communicate to the bots.
- davidrools, on 11/08/2007, -1/+3I figure it's completely fair. Google is doing honest web developers a favor of driving traffic to their site (for free as far as search results go). Requiring the nofollow tag improves the experience of Google search for users...who will use it more and bring more traffic to the honest sites. No one wants to get a first search result listing just because that site bought/traded the most links but doesn't actually have what you're looking for.
- SteveKubrick, on 02/11/2008, -3/+5It may be common knowledge but the fact it is on the digg front page probably suggests that there are still a lot of people who could benefit from it.
- mrurc, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2Every time the algorithm changes to lower the rank of sites abusing the algorithm, people get all whiny. So your latest Google Hack was thwarted. Wah.
- badnewsblair, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1Isn't the fact that it is on the front page proof that it is "new to us" (meaning the people that AREN'T SEOs)?
- altrego99, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1Hmm... what dark secret are you hiding??? Makes me want to write a 'nofollow' sniffer
- redditondigg, on 11/08/2007, -5/+6Yeah, this is kinda odd on the front page. And the fact that some people act surprised is kinda baffling. The must work for the company, or are unbelievable stupid. Probably both, judging by the BS writing.
At least now I know why digg is "rumored" on the super duper we all luv each other valleywag to be worth as much as hotmail! SEO spam! It must pay good! Look for the next article on how to get rich link farming (with our proprietary product).
Also, can't we just determine from certain comments that some people are obviously too dumb to be here (and that says a lot), or are just spamming and delete the accounts. - insomniacal, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1... so Google wants web developers to point out for Google what Google's own secret-recipe algorithms can't figure out on their own?
_That's_ a lazy abdication. Google should simply penalize who they're going to penalize. Link farming isn't that hard to detect -- it just takes a set of human eyes. With all the hiring they've been doing lately, that shouldn't be too hard. - fkr3, on 11/08/2007, -5/+6Google should figure it out for themselves. They're not paying anyone to do this yet they want everyone to do it so they can help improve their search engine.
- inactive, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1Can we make a new tag such as "don't google me bro" I don't care if my site is on google or not. google is just one big ad farm.
- crusher2, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1"Some argue that a reciprocal link exchange does indicate a recommendation..."
It's "reciprocal links" or "link exchange", not "reciprocal link exchange", you moron! - inactive, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1I agree, old
- Scruffydan, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1the goggles they do nothing!
- zer0, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1I understand how this would be beneficial to Google users, but it requires more work on the part of the web developer (assuming you do the HTML by hand) It is also the case that Google may mistake unpaid links for paid ones and thus cause harm to the sites Page Rank. Honestly the nofollow tag is important however i don't think Google should saying how it is to be used.
- NinjaBoy, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1I just see it as a way to get back at all the seo spammers that hit my blog. And anything that involves screwing them over, im down for!
- txgeek, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1No, the SOEs are probably farm clicking the links to get it on the front page, thinking it will generate some support for their cause. The rest of us couldn't care less that Google has made it harder for the spammers to game the search results.
- qpn6ph9q, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1This is the point. They need webmasters to add this contextual attribute to not help them, but to help their users get more appropriate results. If you don't want to participate then DON'T.
- formergthing, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2The fact that this is on the Digg front page probably suggests that there are still a lot of people who can make it happen.
"But you can't game digg!" - CreativeGuy, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1Wow. I've never seen such a large collection of pompous know-it-alls who are so full of themselves that they can't get it through their thick skulls that not everyone has been working and reading on the Web as long as they have. New people get into it all the time and need this info.
The headline was plain enough to know what the article was about. If you don't like it, don't bother commenting or digging. Simple really. - TomEEE, on 11/08/2007, -3/+3Anybody who posted with a positive comment is an idiot.
Your talking out of your ass because the title is about Google and your not web dev. enough to know this is very old news.
Lame - WaterDragon, on 11/14/2007, -1/+1Now all we need is a NOTDiggUp tag for Digg submissions by that really small group of people who have dominated the front page, by all kinds of 'gaming of digg', such as blindly digging each other's stories from multiple accounts.
We also need some digg administrators willing to limit the power games of those few, to give others a chance at the front page.
But none of that will matter soon, if Digg is sold to a corporation...as many of us will be leaving anyhow, being unwilling to be 'sold' to any corporation. - magnusdopus, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1Unfortunately at the same time, there seems to be too wide of an adoption of this tag especially amongst well moderated sites like wikipedia and del.icio.us. The fact is that most search terms don't have sufficient journalistic coverage. Solid companies that need to advertise their products have to go about using black-hat techniques. Google makes valiant attempts to uncover some cases but ultimately the problem is impossible to catch. Even more so with the advent of paid blogging. One site trying to remedy the situation is http://www.wikipop.net. Now if I could just find an angel to fund it...
- Totov, on 11/08/2007, -0/+0The subject may be old, but it is still a good idea. Google is getting clogged up with useless sites. This is one way to stamp some of them out.
- WaterDragon, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1Sounds like the modern equivalent of chain letters!
- preisler, on 11/14/2007, -1/+1Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
- FrankButcher, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1Everything Google does is to make Google more money! They want people to use Adsense instead of paying the webmasters direct. How non-evil of them; praise Google!
- Otto, on 11/08/2007, -2/+1Yes. A site that does not validate is incorrect, wrong, and broken. If you create broken sites, then you are not a web developer.
- fcukbush, on 11/14/2007, -2/+1bury this *****. the guys is obviously buying diggs.
- Arkaris01, on 11/08/2007, -1/+0Probably the reason it is on the front page is not because it's new news. Probably because it is now being enforced. A lot of people took huge hits for not using the nofollow tag in their PR. Any link bought needs to have this text so Google does not count it in the search engine results. It was a rule to follow but was not enforced. Now Google is enforcing it and so it has become relevant again.
-
Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is