|
Not quite what I'm getting at.
The expansion of the term "web 2.0" to encompass a "new style" of design AND the (over)use of existing technologies was simply the broadening of a scope.
What I'm saying about "dofollow" is that it adds extra and unnecessary ambiguity into the already murky waters of the nofollow value and it's use.
For one, it implies that links without the nofollow value added, are always going to be followed and possibly weighted by the search engines. When this is clearly NOT the case.
There are a good number of forums that do not show signatures to "guest" visitors and as SE bots are "guests", the link drops err sorry, signatures will never be followed regardless of the value of the rel attribute.
The one thing this whole industry does NOT need, is more mis-information been pumped into it. Though I do realise it is in the interests of some practitioners to keep the myths and mysteries alive.
__________________
Chris. ->> Please login or register to view this content. Registration is FREE <<-
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
Thought for today:- Is SEO the only industry where all the cowboys are Indians?
|