1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Outsourcing Web 2.0

Discussion in 'White Hat SEO' started by dragiia, Nov 3, 2014.

Tags:
  1. dragiia

    dragiia BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    116
    The danger in creating web 2.0's for back-linking lies in leaving a "foot-print" that could negatively affect your rankings later on. If I get a friend not from the internet to create a web 2.0 and they update it with articles that I send them, would this prove to be a successful high-quality back-link that's impossible to track back to me? I don't have much experience with cloaking and I'd rather stay away from it in general, but I think this would work just as well if not better in the long run, especially if the person uploading the web 2.0 is not involved in any online marketing activities. I believe what I described is essentially a private blog network without some of the authority and without the need to pay for hosting, domain, etc.

    I'm looking for someone's opinion that has done this before or someone that has experience with private blog networks or cloaking. What prevents people from creating a "web 2.0 group" that would essentially build each other's web 2.0's to eliminate footprints? How good is google at determining interrelated blogs from separate IP's.

    Another question: How many Web 2.0's should you create per account. I currently have two web 2.0's pointing to two different sites, but I want to create a 3rd that would link back to one of the same sites, is this safe?
     
  2. koolkake

    koolkake Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    217
    How could google evaluate specific web 2.0 platforms and their footprints (unless it is blogger)?
     
  3. Techxan

    Techxan Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    3,585
    Occupation:
    Local SEOist
    Location:
    TEXAS (you have to yell, its the law.)
    This should work.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. dragiia

    dragiia BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    116
    If I was Google:
    Create a list of sites that currently link to site A. Crawl each site on the list and look for similarities between each other such as the sites they link to, what CMS was used, the city and date of creation, IP address, hosting provider, social profile activities, email address, phone number, search history, forum accounts. Anything that the web 2.0's have in common could be compared to determine if the same person or computer is creating them. I would assume that if enough of these are in common, it would raise a flag, enough flags and the website is de-indexed or authority, serps, etc drops.

    It's just my personal opinion that Google has the ability to monitor these different activities well.
     
  5. TwistedSEO

    TwistedSEO Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2011
    Messages:
    304
    Likes Received:
    192
    What google should do, and what they can do (feasibly) are two different things. Do you know how many websites there are in existence and how many are created each day? They have to look at their ROI too. Right now, the only checks they can run are the most basic (anchor text ratio, spammed/flagged backlinks, velocity, etc.) and even with this they can only run it like once a month because of the complexity running an algorithm against a billion sites that are dynamic and constantly being updated.

    This is why it's so easy to churn and burn.

    There's a lot of things google can detect if they wanted to, but it doesn't make sense for them to do it (money wise). The computational power required simply isn't worth it. Especially since the basic checks is already enough to wipe out majority of the bad SEO's. Why spend magnitudes more power just to catch the small minority that knows how to hide their footprints? This can change in the future of course as processing power increases. They were already investing in quantum processors a few years back if I recall.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2014
  6. dragiia

    dragiia BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    116
    I don't know if "they can't afford it" puts me at ease, but I understand where you're coming from. I've never attempted a churn and burn site, figured you need a few hundred dollars disposable just to test it out.