Manual Links vs Software (THE END ALL TEST)

Discussion in 'Search Engine Optimization' started by falconator, Jul 14, 2012.

  1. falconator

    falconator
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    8
    There are so many debates on the internet today about manual link building vs software's. So many people will say software's are no good ect. But I say search engines don't know the difference. That is why I offer this test, 4 links, 2 from forum profiles and 2 from social bookmark sites. I will give 200 BAF cash to the first person that can tell me which were created manually and which were created 100% with software. It registered, solved the captcha, checked my mail and created the link while I was outside lighting the grill :cool:

    Yes at least one link is from a software and at least one created manually. All 4 links were created today. I would say if humans can't tell the difference then an algorithm can't tell either. As always I don't condone spam. Also if you guess please explain why you think the link is manual or software. Let the test begin!


    Bookmark links

    http://www.wywiad.wqx.pl/show.php/156901
    http://ww.antbook.eu/bookmarks/falcon


    Profile links

    http://punbb.altric.com/profile.php?section=signature&id=614
    http://www.fatboydanfishing.com/member.php?u=10255
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Ben Advice

    Ben Advice
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    5
    With the new Google Penguin update, I would stay away from link software. I know that the practice is 'white hat', but I've noticed that sites with a great deal of links that are not generated organically often suffer a penalty.

    It's also difficult to determine how much link building is required and when it becomes redundant or a waste of time. I would say that with the Penguin update that the only safe practice is manual high quality links.

    Just my opinion.
     
  3. falconator

    falconator
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    8
    I respect your opinion but what is natural? Here is a post I did in a webmaster forum-

    Let’s just say, and sorry for the example if you’re not religious, but it is the best example I could think of. Let’s say Jesus descended from the sky tomorrow. Don't you think that news sites would be linked to it in every way imaginable and do you think these links would only come from dofollow sites and sites with a PR 3 or more? Now let’s say that Jesus, for some reason, decided that he was going to reveal himself to only a small group of people that just so happens to stream video on a low linked, ranks for almost nothing site. He produces miracles for them. Turning water into wine and healing people around the world from a house where one of site owners live and it is all streamed live on their site.

    Imagine the links this site would receive in just a month alone. Millions of not billions of people in all shapes and forms would link to this site. Do you really think Google would ban this site just because it received too many links to fast or because a huge amount of low PR sites linked to it? Is this not the the so called natural links you talk about? Would this not be the natural way a site with something amazing to hear, view or see be linked?

    It reminds me of a person that is superstitious, don’t walk under a ladder or break a mirror because it will bring you bad luck. The reality is it’s only the belief of having the bad luck that creates it. You believe that you are unlucky so when something bad happens like a tree falls on your house, you blame it on being unlucky. In all actuality, its nature just being nature. Trees fall on many houses every year and I’m sure not all the owners walked under a ladder or broke a mirror.

    I’m not going to sit and tell you that I have it all figured out. I’m just speaking from experience and what I have seen. Think about it if Google only rewards those that build links “naturally” and slow then why would they allow us to have links from any area on a site that allows us to put it there ourselves? If Google cared and ranked a site in the search engine or PR by sites that linked to it naturally then it would just discard any link from an area of a site that allowed us to put it there. It would count only the links that was put in an area that the site owner could control.

    What I have seen is sites less than a year old with thousands of links on page one in the first position for a keyword that gets 30,000 exact searches a month and has millions of competing sites. That goes in the face of many things I read on many forums that people say over and over. Things like if you build to many links to a new domain that it will get sandboxed for a year or more and if you build to many links to fast Google will see them as spam and penalize you for it. I seen one site that was around a year old with around 40,000 links in the first position of page one. That is 3,333 links a month, 833.25 links a week or a little less than 120 links a day all from forum profiles, link directories, social bookmarking and articles.

    That means if you sleep 8 hours a night you would have to build 7.5 links every hour, 16 hours a day, every day. Sounds to me like someone was doing some automated linking and yet is number one for 30,000 exact searches a month and everyone says “only build links naturally because that’s what Google wants and likes.” Yes some sites do get “sandboxed” but I would say the sandbox is just Google. Every site indexed with decent content gets a few days or even weeks up front in Google before dropping off the map to the back pages. I think this is Googles way of showing people this is a new site, check it out.

    People then say “my site was sandboxed!” When the truth is it just got its proper ranking from Google and is not that good of a site (yet) in its eyes. People then start the “natural” and slow link building as not to make Google anymore upset then they already have and one day the site is back on the first few pages. Not because the sandbox released them but because over the months they have built enough content and links to their site that Google now favors it.

    Had they quickly added content and links to it they would had been back on the first handful of pages in probably weeks after the sandbox. Google loves content and because of this you can rank well if you just write a lot of unique content before ever even registering your domain. Then once you set up your site add lots of content to it immediately. Then by the time your site is indexed and hopefully before the sandbox Google sees your site as an authority. I even throw some links at it from blog commenting within the first few days. As soon as it is indexed and blog comments because they are indexed and count almost immediately.

    If you want to rank well in the search engine then build a decent amount of content and a lot of backlinks. If you are that worried about building backlinks to fast then set up web 2.0 buffer and link wheels and backlink the crap out of them. This will help pass the link juice to your main site. To be honest with you whether it is automated or not, fast or slow it upset Google. I will give you an example that I have posted in a few threads before so sorry if I’m repeating myself.

    I use Google Webmaster Tools to keep track of links to my site, like many others. If you use GWT then you have probably noticed that Google updates your links around once a month or so. In between these updates I am constantly building links to my site. Weeks and weeks go by with no new links added according to Google. Then one day boom I have hundreds of new links added. So, if Google was so concerned with keeping track of how many links a site gets in any given amount of time then why wouldn’t it update your links as soon as they are indexed?

    I will tell you why, because there is no way for Google to tell the importance of what is displayed on your site to the world except by the number of backlinks it gets. The algorithm can get a basic understanding of what your site is about from the repetition of words. It cannot and is not set up to judge for itself what the world thinks is interesting. Thus we had the birth of the backlink and that is the basic foundation on which the algo was built off of.

    I know the debate will rage on and on and I know some people will totally disagree with what I have said. I know people will still post threads asking “why can’t I get my site on page one?” That is the great part about the internet, freedom, freedom of speech (for the most part) and the freedom to form our own opinions. All I can say is stop being so afraid. I know every site is a labor of love but stop being afraid.

    PS: I didn’t intend this thread to be a religious debate so please don’t turn it in to one, religious or not.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Fergal

    Fergal
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Premium Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Messages:
    10,575
    Likes Received:
    1,165
    Thanks for posting that link test falconator. I'm not familiar with social bookmarking sites at all, so I could not give an educated opinion on which of those, if any were automated.

    I don't see any link on the PunBB site. The PunBB site appears to be full of nothing but spam, so I would suggest that it is easier to get an automated link from there. Plus there is no human verification check on registration on the PunBB site so that would also make it much easier to get an automated link from it. The domain name of that forum doesn't appear to be indexed by Google, so I'm not sure that a link from that site would do any good to your rankings in Google.

    I see a link to Facebook in the "About Me" tab of your profile on the fishing site. The fact that the content on that site appears to be related to the site, i.e. the forum posts and threads are mostly about fishing and the fact that there is a human verification check on their registration page leads me to believe that it would be much more difficult to get an automated link on that site. That fishing forum is also well recognised by Google so a link from it would be more helpful to your site, than a similar link from the first forum.

    Based on the above I'd say that you got an automated link on the PunBB site and a human created one on the Fishing site. The fact that something seems to have "caught" and removed your link from the PunBB site, does however baffle me a little.

    I do like your Jesus story analogy and feel that you make a lot of great points there. My personal opinion is that the combination of human expertise and technology used by Google to monitor their search engine listings, would recognise the difference between a huge amount of links and discussion concerning the Jesus story and a huge amount of fake profile links to say a Viagra site. My belief is that Google look at the diversity of links and that the Jesus story would generate a much greater diversity of links, e.g. from posts in forums, discussions on blogs and social networking sites, links from the home pages of major news sites etc. The automated links to the Viagra site would mostly be from fake profiles and this would raise flags with Google.

    To put it a slightly different way, the Jesus story would generate lots of links from sites with PR 0 and 1, but also a lesser number of links from sites with PR all the way up to at least PR9. However the automated link building campaign would also get lots of PR 0 and PR 1 links, but most probably no links on PR9 pages and I believe that Google would recognise that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. falconator

    falconator
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    8
    That is true, Google would probably notice that all your links are from just forum profiles. The thing I have always stressed to people is link diversity. Take the software I used for example, it automates forum profiles, RSS feeds, link directories, articles, bookmarks and blog comments. Links should come from anywhere and everywhere. PR or No PR, Do-follow or no-follow and that would look natural.
     
  6. ServerGurus.com

    ServerGurus.com
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    I personally would not trust automated software -- SEO is supposed to be organic and manual, so it should be done manually. I believe it's that simple.
     
  7. trickvogas

    trickvogas
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not trust on automated software. I am working manual link building.
     
  8. jamescorden12

    jamescorden12
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not use automated software for link building. For SEO effective link building is organic and manual submission. If google found at any ware you will use automated software for link building google penalize your website or down your page rank and your ranking.
     
  9. Dawey

    Dawey
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    21
    The question is not about recognizing one or two links. It's about patterns, frequenzy of certain keywords, how likely it is to get a certain link on certain type of pages.

    Google don't care about a few spam links or a few unnatural links, but they do care about unnatural link profiles. The whole profile in its totality will tell google if there is something fishy going on. If you get an exact amount of links, like if you get 400 links everyday for one month, then Google will surely suspect you as a spammer. Link softwares can not understand what is considered as a natural link profile. And most users don't understand to use this kind of software to manage a link profile that Google understand as natural.

    So it's still goes down to your own understanding of SEO, what program you use and how. Programs can not teach you common sense.
     
  10. tianshaguli

    tianshaguli
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    1
    Break the rules, can't do killed, the station will be killed
     
  11. pentawebexperts

    pentawebexperts
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    6
  12. cesspadilla

    cesspadilla
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    194
    This link is redirecting to https://mysql.pro-hosting.cz/bookmarks/falcon and giving me an error Not Found. The other link http://punbb.altric.com/profile.php?section=signature&id=614 is giving me "Bad request. The link you followed is incorrect or outdated."

    Actually I don't want a debate on this issue although have you tried to read some of their patents? If so then you will know how their algo thinks (or works). I'm not an expert I admit that. Most of us are. But then I have my own way of creating links without the support of softwares. Yes, there might be a debate onto whether Google knows or not if the link is natural or not. But then I did find some interesting things that Matt Cutts said in SMX Live: You&A With Matt Cutts (2012):

    So you get the idea. Well yes, you might be free to use the software now. But then Google is finding ways to make their SERPs a quality one. Most of the people nowadays abuse the use of software and they tend to use it on all sorts of things even in Forums which is really a headache not just for me but with other moderators and admins.

    Getting faster links or do your promotion with real people. Which one is the best way? Google wouldn't be the one buying your products and services. It's the people who view your website.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. StarkSEM

    StarkSEM
    uix_expand uix_collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    16
    One of the biggest disadvantageous to using automatic or "botting" link building software is that in the end... you and who ever else used that system have the same links.

    Most of the software out there, like SENukeX, does not automatically update their link packages, so if you're buying say a monthly subscription via SENukeX, you are bound to eventually get the same re-do or do over links, which leaves a huge foot print for Google-Techs to catch on.

    Just my two cents.


    But to the OP, unless you are spinning too much of your articles, you really can't tell. The broken english is when I can tell it's bad.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page