What is Digg?13 Comments
- slapshot24, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1115 minutes of fame and the first three comments are the best Digg can do?
I guess they're all still searching for something. - Poco, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Interesting that Google doesn't even follow the no follow.
I like the way that Yahoo handles it and that would seem to correspond to what wikipedia wants, no one gets a link boost because it is linked in wikipedia, but at least the search engines can find it. - str3ama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4if you 3 are done with your inane bickering...we can get back to the actual article...
The article basically boils down to Google not following the link if its nofollow, Yahoo indexes the link if it didn't know of the site previously- regardless of whether it has nofollow (but it doesn't give it credit, Ask does not support no follow so it indexes it regardless. - Rammsteined, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Wow, what an insightful conversation! I really feel like I learned something about the universe, thanks!
- lnxaddct, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The no follow attribute is used because of spammers putting links on sites wherever they can. Even if a moderator removes a spammer link within a few hours, chances are that many crawlers have picked it up. No follow means what it says, and the fact that other search engines do follow is bad because the spammers still have incentive to spam the hell out of wikipedia, or blogs, forums, etc... regardless of whether or not the no follow attribute is used. Trusted links from trusted users probably shouldn't have the attribute, but until there is a framework in place for that in wikipedia and other applications, an absolute approach like that which is currently in place is for now the best solution.
- wolfkeeper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I completely disagree, on theoretical grounds, at the very least.
The Google technique is unequivocally not incorrect. Google's strategy *cannot* do anything bad.
With the yahoo technique simply spam referencing something from the wikipedia means that it gets into the index. That alone is the wrong thing to do; web sites should get no advantage from spamming the wikipedia; that's the whole reason that nofollow is used. - ff0000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It makes sense to me that Google would not follow the no follow (didn't they create it?). If they wanted a way to follow links but not rank them, I assume they would have "no follow" and "no rank", or something to that effect.
- imdrew, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Use Search Status to see if a link has a no follow http://www.quirk.biz/searchstatus
- Linguino, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you ask me, a non-expiring no-follow attribute kind of defeats the intent or purpose of the internet with relation to SEs. Yahoo is definitely correct here. If you link out, you link out. This attribute only helps spammer, in the long run. If you are worried about spam, have better detection methods in place.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Website owners should be cautious about scamming link exchanges. Sometimes, they put the no follow tag beside the link to your website.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0This information is so 2004. Old news - bury it.
- vanbacon, on 10/12/2007, -17/+1And the opposite would be ignorant Homogay conservative loser.
Yah that fits you qute nicely. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -20/+1what an ignorant homogay liberal loser.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is