Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: Unethical SEO

  1. #31
    Hellas's Avatar
    Hellas is offline Very Unusual Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Bosnia
    Posts
    1,051
    Thanks
    214
    Thanked 292 Times in 205 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kovich View Post
    So - have you ever filed a spam report with Google?
    Nope and I never will. Its a low kick and I would rather left the Google and time take care of it.

    Do you monitor your competition?
    Yes in some cases. Also trying to get backlinks from some of their sources

    Do you engage in unethical SEO?
    Nope. Only white hat but few times I got involved in BH without intention to do it.
    Mostly because of lack of knowledge.

  2. #32
    TopDogger's Avatar
    TopDogger is offline Über Hund
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hellfire, AZ
    Posts
    3,138
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 924 Times in 707 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kovich View Post
    So no, it's not unethical to engage in standard SEO. It's unethical to engage in SEO that violates the search engine's rules and guidelines.
    This is the faulty part with the ethics debate. A search engine's viewpoint is self-serving.

    I follow their rules, but I do not see them as a guiding light for moral behavior. Ethics is a moral philosophy issue. Each search engine has their own problems with ethics and activities that some people justifiably view as illegal or unethical such as stealing copyrighted images, invasion of privacy issues, partnerships with click fraud rings, PPC billing overcharges, etc.

    Don't you find it curious that the largest link seller on the web penalizes sites that sell links? Which side of the ethical argument does that fall on? Who is unethical? Is the link seller who doesn't follow a search engine's guidelines or a search engine who appears to be trying to limit their competition?

    Ethics is always a matter of viewpoint. Perhaps you should be asking if someone knowingly violates search engine guidelines, rather that referring to it as unethical SEO.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  3. Thanked by:

    bogart (11 March, 2010), Hellas (15 March, 2010)

  4. #33
    Andy101's Avatar
    Andy101 is online now Code Otaku
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Kanazawa
    Posts
    1,341
    Thanks
    180
    Thanked 310 Times in 237 Posts
    I must admit that I don't look at my competition, if I have any. I just focus on my websites and aim to deliver good content to whatever visitors I may get landing on my pages.

    My focus is on building more and more web sites/pages and doing what I know to optimize them and build traffic by contributing to the web community.

  5. Thanked by:

    Kovich (11 March, 2010)

  6. #34
    Mike Dammann's Avatar
    Mike Dammann is offline Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Geographically flexible
    Posts
    978
    Blog Entries
    3
    Thanks
    237
    Thanked 182 Times in 148 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TopDogger View Post
    This is the faulty part with the ethics debate. A search engine's viewpoint is self-serving.

    I follow their rules, but I do not see them as a guiding light for moral behavior. Ethics is a moral philosophy issue. Each search engine has their own problems with ethics and activities that some people justifiably view as illegal or unethical such as stealing copyrighted images, invasion of privacy issues, partnerships with click fraud rings, PPC billing overcharges, etc.

    Don't you find it curious that the largest link seller on the web penalizes sites that sell links? Which side of the ethical argument does that fall on? Who is unethical? Is the link seller who doesn't follow a search engine's guidelines or a search engine who appears to be trying to limit their competition?

    Ethics is always a matter of viewpoint. Perhaps you should be asking if someone knowingly violates search engine guidelines, rather that referring to it as unethical SEO.
    Exactly. It's their rules and if you get punished for breaking them, then you pay the price. Other than that it's a free market.
    My main blog is at Rhesusnegative.net
    For information about personal fitness and training, visit: Berlintotrain - Personal Fitness Trainer in Berlin, Germany

  7. #35
    Bessagnes is offline Unknown Net Builder
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Well,
    I have a question to ask you guys.....?
    what are the ways to consider the ethics of the visitor come to our website...And What would be it's remarks when the visitor is not feeling comfortable with the webpage regarding it's content....? Kindly share some tips...

  8. #36
    Sami4u's Avatar
    Sami4u is offline Butterflies Forever
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,422
    Thanks
    697
    Thanked 293 Times in 221 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bessagnes View Post
    Well,
    I have a question to ask you guys.....?
    what are the ways to consider the ethics of the visitor come to our website...And What would be it's remarks when the visitor is not feeling comfortable with the webpage regarding it's content....? Kindly share some tips...
    Hi,

    I am a little lost with the question.

    I would feel that the ethics of the visitor would all depend on the content of your site.

    I would think if your website is on Mom and Apple Pie it won't get the same people that would be searching for and come to a site like Larceny Tips.

    As far as not feeling comfortable with the webpage again I am lost?

    Are you talking a hate site or about the Obama health care plan? Both will deffently make people uncomfortable just to different degrees.

    Sami
    Current Celebrity Gossip Movies & More TV Site
    Find out how I'm able to get up to 420 backlinks for month, by spending 30 seconds per day...all for FREE! - Click Here

  9. #37
    Social-Media is offline Search Marketing Consultant
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 23 Times in 21 Posts
    Using a keyword in the meta description 4 times is not really spamming IMO. I doubt that would trip any triggers at Google since so many people who have no clue about SEO might do this naturally because they don't know any better.

    I generally agree with the previous post who as a majority answer no, no, no to your three questions. I wouldn't report people doing bad things because 1) as they said Google likely already knows and 2) I don't want to attract any attention to myself even if all I do is on the up and up. I would however disagree about keeping track of the competition. I learn a LOT about what I can do better by evaluating my competitors' onsite optimizations as well as their back link profile. It's has never been a waste of time. I've gotten some very good ideas that turned out to be very useful with getting ranked by doing so.

  10. #38
    bogart's Avatar
    bogart is offline Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,772
    Thanks
    1,886
    Thanked 776 Times in 609 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Social-Media View Post
    I don't want to attract any attention to myself even if all I do is on the up and up.

    You now need to file a spam report using webmaster tools.

  11. #39
    memenode's Avatar
    memenode is offline Net Builder
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    490
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    176
    Thanked 152 Times in 116 Posts
    I define as unethical everything that involves fraud and force (which includes theft).

    Keyword stuffing isn't unethical because the person doing it is merely using his or his rented property as he pleases. He's not doing anything that denies you from doing whatever you want with yours. He's not unethical because Google doesn't like the practice because he doesn't have an explicit contract with Google that would bind him to any particular behavior.

    For the same reason, I don't consider link selling unethical. Google doesn't like it, sure, it's against their guidelines. But since when does Google own my site? It's my site and I'll do with it whatever I want, even if I risk lessening my Google rankings with it.

    Do you want a real example of an utterly unethical practice? Spam! When somebody comes to your site which in its terms of use clearly states that spamming (clearly defined) is not allowed and someone still does it, even as you keep deleting hordes of spam every day, that's a violation. The spammers are using my property in ways in which I have not allowed them to which amounts to pure and simple theft.

    The saddest thing is that there's this thing called "blackhat SEO" which allows for such tactics and carries a rather large following, to the point of seeming legitimate to some people.

    Oh and what's illegal or legal doesn't enter into it. Laws are ridiculously out of sync with moral philosophy they're not even worthy of attention except to avoid being kidnapped or stolen from by the officials.

    That's how I think of it.

  12. #40
    xxtoni's Avatar
    xxtoni is offline xxtoni
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    353
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 42 Times in 34 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by memenode View Post
    I define as unethical everything that involves fraud and force (which includes theft).

    Keyword stuffing isn't unethical because the person doing it is merely using his or his rented property as he pleases. He's not doing anything that denies you from doing whatever you want with yours. He's not unethical because Google doesn't like the practice because he doesn't have an explicit contract with Google that would bind him to any particular behavior.

    For the same reason, I don't consider link selling unethical. Google doesn't like it, sure, it's against their guidelines. But since when does Google own my site? It's my site and I'll do with it whatever I want, even if I risk lessening my Google rankings with it.

    Do you want a real example of an utterly unethical practice? Spam! When somebody comes to your site which in its terms of use clearly states that spamming (clearly defined) is not allowed and someone still does it, even as you keep deleting hordes of spam every day, that's a violation. The spammers are using my property in ways in which I have not allowed them to which amounts to pure and simple theft.

    The saddest thing is that there's this thing called "blackhat SEO" which allows for such tactics and carries a rather large following, to the point of seeming legitimate to some people.

    Oh and what's illegal or legal doesn't enter into it. Laws are ridiculously out of sync with moral philosophy they're not even worthy of attention except to avoid being kidnapped or stolen from by the officials.

    That's how I think of it.
    and you are right,at least in my book.As long as you dont damage other people or their property you may do whatever you like,of course Google doesent like black hat techniques,but I dont like Pop music,should all pop performers be rounded up and killed ?
    Of course not...
    Search engines dont own the internet,on your site you may do anything you like as long as you are not damaging other people or their property.But blackhat is BAD for your site,because after a while search engines find out that you use these techniques and then your site wont see the light ever again...

  13. Thanked by:

    Hellas (12 July, 2010)

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •