<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/600789</link>
		<description>Comments by Montreal SEO</description>
<item>
<title>Paul O&#039;Flaherty : SEO/SEM &ldquo;Do Follow&rdquo; Blogs list pisses me off</title>
<link>http://pauloflaherty.com/2008/09/22/seosem-do-follow-blogs-list-pisses-me-off/#IDComment29222383</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m sorry you don&amp;#039;t see the point I was making in my second paragraph.   Also, as I see it, the content of this thread is still current. If the content was outdated or lacked any value, I wouldn&amp;#039;t waste my time - regardless of the 1-2 cents of potential link juice it *might* offer me.  Do I appreciate the minuscule (if any) amount of link juice offered by a &amp;quot;do-follow&amp;quot; blog? Sure I do. I make an effort to engage in intelligent discussion on topics that concern me. I also like to see benefits in terms of networking, sharing ideas, gaining insight, and yes, any possible link juice that &amp;#039;might&amp;#039; go any of my various sites.  Sometimes we let our prejudices blind us from the full spectrum of others&amp;#039; intentions. That being said, I appreciate your frustration with spammers, I&amp;#039;m on the receiving end of dozens every day of the week.  I&amp;#039;ve participated in a few blog threads due to the fact that they actually advertise they are &amp;quot;do-follow&amp;quot; friendly. I&amp;#039;ve since been back to the same blogs to participate in further discussion because of their content, writing style, or overall blog vibe.  I saw some value in your post, and I attempted to add some intelligent feedback. My agenda might not be 100% to your liking, but is that ever the case anywhere?  </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 2 Aug 2009 18:26:25 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://pauloflaherty.com/2008/09/22/seosem-do-follow-blogs-list-pisses-me-off/#IDComment29222383</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Paul O&#039;Flaherty : SEO/SEM &ldquo;Do Follow&rdquo; Blogs list pisses me off</title>
<link>http://pauloflaherty.com/2008/09/22/seosem-do-follow-blogs-list-pisses-me-off/#IDComment29218105</link>
<description>As others have mentioned in this thread, all blogs will get their share of spammers, regardless of whether no-follow attributes are present or not. So many spam comments are automated anyway, bots travel the net and make auto comments on non-registration blogs.  While some might actively search for and choose &amp;quot;do-follow&amp;quot; blogs to engage in discussion, often this type of visitor has full intention of contributing to the discussion, and merely wants to engage where here will also be rewarded. </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 2 Aug 2009 17:20:24 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://pauloflaherty.com/2008/09/22/seosem-do-follow-blogs-list-pisses-me-off/#IDComment29218105</guid>
</item><item>
<title>David Leonhardt&#039;s SEO Marketing Express : Want a link on a throw-away domain?</title>
<link>http://www.seo-writer.com/blog/2009/06/24/want-a-link-on-a-throw-away-domain/#IDComment26704003</link>
<description>...but for how long.   There are many tricks in the book to earn a site &amp;quot;trust&amp;quot;, but over time the SE algos get tweaked to disregard the attempts at having a site *seem* trusted.   So while the SE manipulation flavour-of-the year might work today, this is why I&amp;#039;ll always put at least equal time and energy on making a site worth linking to. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Jul 2009 18:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.seo-writer.com/blog/2009/06/24/want-a-link-on-a-throw-away-domain/#IDComment26704003</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>