Allow publishers to add the rel nofollow tag in links
According to the latest Google practices to penalize guest blogging websites for publishing spammy links, please allow publishers to publish links with the rel nofollow tag.
Please let them select if they want to dofollow or nofollow the links in the post instead of forcing them publish dofollow only - this practice is AGAINST google's webmaster guidelines.
Please consider this for more details why the nofollow tag is compulsory.
Miguel Silva commented
Yes, I think there's a simple solution to this:
While creating a new post marketters have the option to choose a "guest post" and therefore have Follow links OR choose "sponsored post" with noFollow links.
The Bloggers can therefore bid only on sponsored posts if they do not want to provide followed links.
It's Simple as that.
About the discussion here, I'm at SEO for more than 10 years without any penalised site so far and I agree with Pavan Solapure. You are only in trouble with Google with followed links if its clear that the post is from someone else than the blog owner. So if you:
- Do not use credits
- Have several different links and not just 1 link to a commercial company on the article
- Do not publish several articles from the same company in your blog
You should be fine!
Pavan Solapure commented
If you are publishing guest post under your own user profile and without any author bio or link, I don't see any harm if you have some related dofollow links.
ok, PJ, I won't argue with you anymore because you are a lost cause. However, Google is gonna do the same thing with you similar towhat happened to MBG because you encourage users to break the rules.
Assuming this risk is nonsense for me as long as my blog has very good traffic stats.
Andrei - as we have repeatedly told you dropped domains are not acceptable and that is why your site was declined. We don't require follow links - its down to the parties involved. If a marketer wants a follow link but gets nofollow - we do have a problem with that.
@Laura Ginn: when banned, a spam blog won't get 80% out of its approx. 8-9k daily visitors from organic searches.
I completely follow Google's guidelines but I highly doubt you follow them too. It's your problem, anyway. Unfortunately you and other advertisers/bloggers as well as PJ don't understated that you actually contribute to the death of guest blogging playing against Google's TOS by requiring dofollow links.
Instead of blaming me for nofollowing links, you'd better write useful posts where the promotional purpose is secondary to original and quality content. Is this how a quality post should actually look like - http://lerablog.org/internet/best-web-directories-for-2013-2014/ or http://mashable.com/2013/07/15/child-tracking-apps/
Secondly, you don't even have a clue what a dropped domain is, but this is another story. If you think a domain that changed its ownership, which was never parked or dropped to the default registrar page is a... "dropped domain" then you are definitely wrong, sorry to say. The old website was given to me by a friend to manage it, I redesigned it, added more content while keeping some of the old posts too. Fell free to check archive.org if you don't believe me :)
A dropped domain is that kind of domain that you buy from the marketplace and is parked at the registrar for a while.
All in all, good luck with your dofollow practices :) When you'll get penalized by Google just don't cry.
Laura Ginn commented
I can see two issues with this Andrei:
1 - Your site is a dropped domain. I have blocked your blog time and time again from bidding on my posts because I do not want to place articles on a spam (in Google's eyes) website. Not only that, but you publish articles on numerous subjects and link to any old website so your site is now, in effect, a link farm.
2 - Completely disregarding the point above, you want to charge people for no-follow links. However, you have realised that most of the people on this site are only after do-follow links so you are charging for these and then moaning that it is against Google's terms of service. No-one is making you charge for these links (I presume you can still offer your blog for free), and no-one is making you publish do-follow links. You simple just avoid all "guest posts" on this site and opt for the "sponsored posts" instead. The problem you are finding is that most people will not publish an article containing a no-follow link. Advertisors will only do this when the site is high quality and is going to be beneficial for them traffic-wise.
No offense, but I don't know why anyone in their right mind would pay for a no-follow link on your blog, and this doesn't seem to be the right platform for you. Postjoint isn't breaking Google's terms of service, it is down to each individual blogger to weigh up what they think is right and act accordingly. You can't have your cake and eat it.
@Ahmad Wali: I had the same problem, I added nofollow and everything was ok. Submit a reconsideration request after nofollowing spammy links from blog posts and your PR will be back. You were manually penalized for publishing spam links in blog posts.
Regarding PJ, they now require dofollow as I get an email from them asking me for dofollow only in guest posts. I refused it and they banned me under the reason of "dropped domain" :)))
Also, once you nofollow the links you'll maybe see a spike in traffic from google. My blog went from approx 5-6k unique daily visitors before penalty to up to 9k daily now that I added nofollow to absolutely all external links.
Another thing you can do is to allow authors to register and submit articles themselves and you only approve or reject these articles.
Also, permit authors to setup google authorship along with their posts. This feature will put more weight on your blog in time.
Ahmad Wali commented
For Marketers/Advertisers, I would say accept the truth because Post Joint is a good place to "Advertise" in affordable rates. I usually charge £119 for advertising and £50 for Guest post. And many companies are happy with "No-Follow" because of the traffic they receive. Most of the advertisers provide quality content.
The advantage here is that on Post Join you can choose any budget you like. One of the Post Joint advertiser contacted me asking to place links for $20. I said you can do this through Post Join and if you contact me through my blog I will charge £50.
Understand the value here and policies by Google and don't be too greedy for "do-follow". If you have a great content, I will publish it for free!
Ahmad Wali commented
Also, my blog got penalized and many Post Joint marketers contacted me to make it Do Follow. I said sorry I have to make them no-follow in order to remove the penalty. Now I am not publishing any Guest Post that is asking for do follow.
and, because I am fair with you till the end, I closed the 2 paypal disputes. you don't deserve my money but shame on you for adopting such treatment for publishers that were fair with you. Just learn to respect them more and appreciate the truth.
I was planning to invest even more in your platform but with all the confusion that exists in your mind regarding dropped domains versus sites that were changed their ownerships, redesigned and improved - you have to think twice in the future and don't make the same mistake against any other publishers. Better inform more on this topic before acting.
And, one last thing, don't urge publishers to disregard Google TOS because Google is actually the Internet master whether or not we accept it..
Sir, you can't really make a difference between a dropped domain and a domain that has changed its ownership. The first case supposes the domain was parked at least ONCE! My domain was never parked, I simply changed the previous design, keeping some of the former posts under a new design. That's all but you clearly don't make a difference between the two different aspects.
Anyway it is up to you to do whatever you want but I won't pay for a service that I was banned from while everything i did was to respect Google TOS. You really deserve to get banned the same way as MBG because you force publishers to use dofollow in guest posts.
Andrei - Your site has been declined because we have received a number of complaints about it being dropped. You've also been offering on all sorts of opportunities even when there is no relevance. Our policy has stated we don't accept such sites from day one.
As for Google's policy, we are an independent intermediary that makes connections. What the parties do is their choice. We see that you have published a large number of paid follow posts with a total value of nearly $3000 so we understand why you would be upset. We reserve the right to only grant access to approved users (please refer to our terms). We also see that you have started PayPal disputes for credits that you have used and have made significant earnings on. We will deal with these and any other actions accordingly.
you clearly violate Google's TOS and will soon end like MBG
You said you have no problem with nofollow but this is the answer I got from you to my problem via email:
"Please don't offer on opportunities which are labelled as "Guest" if you're not gonna publish follow links."
requiring dofollow in guest posts is AGAINST google's policies and against what Matt Cutts said when he started the fight against guest blogging - http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/guest-blogging/
We don't have a problem with anyone adding nofollow tags. We are an independent intermediary and its down to the parties involved to decide this mutually. We don't think its our place to say what you can and can't do with your websites. The point is that the content within the original opportunity is what was agreed, and you should not change this without consulting the author first. Of course there may be good reasons to change the links, such as receiving an outbound links warning. In these cases, its in the interest of the marketer that the site complies due to the links pointing back to their sites / client sites.
We will also be adding options for bloggers to opt out of opportunities with follow links, and for marketers to state their preference upfront.
following the My Blog Guest penalty that happened early this week, I think all bloggers and advertisers should understand that nofollow for links if a MUST!
*since last week
actually this strategy started to work; seems more and more marketers started to understand that nofollow is the new good-to-go they must follow in regards to what Matt Cutts said. Also, link removal requirements suddenly stopped last week.
JJ COOP commented
Andrei I am sorry but you are completely clueless as to what publishers actually want here. Nobody is interested in buying nofollow posts in bulk - if they were, they would be adding them with nofollow already added. They're not doing that, are they?
Quality of post has relatively little to do with how much traffic it'll send - a far more important factor is the strength of the blog its being posted on. Strong blog = likely that the content will rank for something in Google.
For smaller blogs... the only thing they have to offer is the fact there is links in the post. Its not likely to rank for much/anything.
Then when you go out of country the effect is even greater - I might be able to produce a brilliant piece of content and have it published on a USA or Canadian targeted blog. Yet I'm trying to sell something to UK consumers... at best all they can offer me is curiosity clickers who simply can't buy. They are worthless to me, and likely most other UK/other country bloggers.
I don't think you understand how little value there is in what you're selling (or proposing to sell)...