Increased Penalty for Irrelevant IBL's?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Are Google's algorithm's now penalizing sites for having not-relevant IBL's?
Or penalizing more than they used to?

The number if IBL's to my site that Google recognizes has stayed pretty
steady. However, I got on some 'list' that has caused a lot of unrequested
IBL's from Link farms or something even though I don't have reciprocal links
to them. My  content has been updated periodically, but not in a way that I
would expect to effect ratings.

My PR got knocked down from it's long-held 5 to a 4, my site completely
disappeared for my primary search term, and its decreased a bit for other,
less productive, search terms.

My site has occasionally disappeared for a couple days at a time, only to
re-appear in the top ten , but that was without a PR change. Its been a
couple weeks now and I'm starting to think this time it's permanent.

So, does that happen with IBL's, and more importantly does anyone know of a
strategy for preventing this?


Bob Kochem
| MinuteMan Systems - Project Management Software |
| |
| PO Box 152, Belmont, MA 02478 USA (617)489-5639 |

Re: Increased Penalty for Irrelevant IBL's?

Quoted text here. Click to load it
know of a
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It has never been shown that google honors reciprocal linking in
"relevant" or similar sites.

How would that be possible?


Site Timeline