I have been thinking about this for a while. Of course, I've done my fair share of blog comment spam. Mostly for crappy adsense sites that I don't care that much about. But for my main sites I don't use automated tools to submit anything. Of course I harvest 24/7, as anyone should, but that's just scraping the internet. I'm not spamming anyone. I don't use Xrumer. I don't spam profile links, I tried Sick Submitter but hot daaaym is it slow. I don't recommend it. Profile links are an absolute BITCH to get indexed. (I developed a system to do that but it takes a LOT of resources such that it's not really worth it anymore. G is really getting a lot more sophisticated in terms of what it indexes.) So generally I just stick to the high PR links as recommended by 'white hat' SEO practitioners. I get these links by submitting relevant posts manually, but of course harvested with Scrapebox and the wonderful Hrefer. Is that blackhat? I don't understand why this difference is there between Black Hat and White Hat SEO. Of course blatant Xrumer blasting all day is black hat because it is against Google TOS. But doesn't G also NOT want any active link building on the part of the webmaster. Maybe the webmaster would write a few articles which pass an editorial team like ezine, or submit to a heavily edited directory e.g. yahoo, for business promotion but not necessarily the link. G wants webmasters to say 'hey, this is a useful site for X, I want my readers to see it', and then link to it using anchor text X. The only SEO you should do as stated by Matt Cutts is general on page, tags etc canonical URLs, etc. Active link building yourself whether automated or manual e.g. mass directory submission, article submission, social bookmarking for the SAKE of the link itself rather than OTHER people talking about it, or specifically WEBMASTERS linking to it NATURALLY, this is all against what Google wants and hence should be regarded as Blackhat too. All this high and mighty WhiteHat = good and Blackhat = bad guys is all bullshit. Google is living in an ideal world that doesn't exist. Say you make a new website and it is awesome. But no one knows about it. How are you gonna promote it? You have to promote it somehow. Therefore you build links so people can find it. That is technically against Google's wishes, people are somehow supposed to magically come across your website, the exact URL of this new non-indexed site has come to them in their dreams, they type it in and they link to it on their site because they think it's an awesome site. Yeah that's cool but 99.999% of the time that will never happen. Yeah there are viral successes but 99.999% of people are going to have to shout to get heard. You have the right to promote your business, Google is the biggest search engine on this earth therefore you will have to do all you can to get found in it. That means actively building links. I argue that whatever techniques you use, so called 'whitehat' or 'blackhat', ranging from simple manual directory submission all the way to complex XRUMER fuelled link pyramids, networks, link pushes and so forth, they are all against Google TOS when you actively go on a mass link building spree. Manual or automatic doesn't make a different. So those so called 'white hat' guys can sit on their ivory towers, their shit stinks just as bad as ours, we are all violators of the idealistic, unrealistic, and frankly super gay policies of Google and that annoying loser Matt Cunts. Just had to get that off my chest.