Reciprocal linking revisited

[djbaxter]

Taking my Pet Peeves for a Walk in Linking Park
by Diane Aull
March 17, 2009

It seems any time there's a discussion of linking, at least one or two participants will automatically append the word "reciprocal," as though that's the only kind of link there is. And at least one person will jump in to declare Google "frowns on" reciprocal linking.

So to carry this line of thinking to its logical conclusion: since apparently the only kinds of links that exist are reciprocal and Google hates reciprocal links, we all ought to give up and go home to our knitting?

Pardon my bluntness (it's that old age crankiness thing again) but... balderdash.

...MORE

 

[Linda Buquet]

What a great, catchy title. I wish I could come up with link bait that good!

 

[Rob_TID]

Common sense should dictate that a certain amount of recips are both natural and desirable.

The keyword that Google uses is EXCESSIVE reciprocal linking.

 

[liquidgraph]

Reciprocal linking with no-follow shouldn't bleed PR either.

 

[djbaxter]

Reciprocal linking with no-follow shouldn't bleed PR either.

Reciprocal linking without no-follow won't "bleed PR" either. "PR bleed" is a myth.