Hey guys, I've got a few sites and in honesty was very lazy... here's the background....... did a lot of scrapebox comments linking directly to my sites. I had been building a few thousand links to each site every week and they were all doing well. I STOPPED ALL link building on all my sites in January except for two - a brand new site and another one that hit page 1 for a very competitive phrase (got upto number 4 the week before penguin hit). The ones I had spammed to hell and simply stopped building links for for months - BUT they're all doing really well! They're top for most phrases and have a good authority. The two I was focusing on with loads of links since Penguin - they sneaks onto google and then vanish! They don't deindex, just have really pants positions and not in the top 100 for anything despite the new site being a very local niche. I have revamped the structure of both sites, got rid of all the duplicated meta tags and lazy bits, added blogs into them for new and fresh content, and generally made the sites much better. Personally despite what's happened I don't think it's the links that have done the damage on their own, I think it's been a combination of things. Anyhow I figure I have to stop being lazy and do things properly now, so step one is that I'm building web 2.0s pointing directly to the new site as a trial, and then will scrapebox the web 2.0s and getting social bookmarks. How many will I need? I'm guessing that's going to be a "how long is a piece of string" question, but I was thinking of making 75 web 2.0s each month, updating all of them (somehow) each week/month with more content and the odd link or two. Then blasting the 75 (and growing) sites on scrapebox, maybe some xrumer, twitter and facebook shares etc... Would 75 well managed and updated web 2.0s frequently blasted be better than 750 ones that aren't doing much and just get the odd blast? Thanks guys!