Looking for list of Social Bookmarking Sites with DF Backlinks and PR1 or more

A well thought, explained and reasoned answer. If you disagree with something, say why. Just like your first post.

As I said, for me it is all wrong but it does show that you put some thought and tried to do your homework :slight_smile:

Digg is a link hole, the links shared over there don’t seem to exist on internet… They are throwing all bookmarks in their DB probably.

Of course I can’t force-ask Digg to place my links on their site, but, it’s totally misleading what’s happening on internet today… People go to sites like Digg to share their content…

Guys,

All the replies that I’m writing here are going into some place for reviews… therefore, I’ll catcha once this situation is resolved.

Below is what I’m getting.

Thanks for your cooperation!

Hello,

Our automated spam filter, Akismet, has temporarily hidden your post for review.

A staff member will review your post soon, and it should appear shortly.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

Off Topic

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:16, topic:214632”]
Our automated spam filter, Akismet, has temporarily hidden your post for review.
[/quote]Yes - sorry about that.

For some reason, Akismet occasionally seizes upon perfectly good posts with no links, and decides they are Spam, and three of yours in this thread fell victim. I can only apologise.

With further “training”, the plug-in should get better at detecting Spam accurately.

Feels good to see that this site is using akisment… You and this site are doing a good job… I can come over here and argue and debate with you all… only a privilege…

2 Likes

It that case, you might find it more helpful and more accurate to check the “whois” information. e.g. https://whois.domaintools.com/reddit.com

Unlike PR, it’s updated regularly.

Not exactly, I have Social bookmarking sites list from 2010 and before, guess what happened to most of them? Super hit Sites with PR like 5 - 7 are dead today… For me it’s a pain to see such sites gone coz of spam. Not one, but many. Guess what? More than half of social sites that existed in addme about 6 yrs back don’t exist anymore.

I have been in site promotion biz since 2003, been in IT since 1994, sometimes active and then passive… and so on…

The survival rate of a site (including backlinks) is very very low… The only virtual real estate on internet which will continue to host your backlinks are fortune type sites.

I can work my @ ss off to make backlinks, but, what will happen 5 - 10 yrs from now? If do that blindly most likely, most of my back links will disappear from internet in future.

Actually, if I share my link on a site like digg, it’ll never ever ever even appear in internet, let alone survival.

Check the att… SBM is for social bookmarking site… The survival rate of a social site (regardless of it’s success and PR) which hosts links for others is not more than 10%

So PR is not a good indication of the longevity of a site. At least by checking the whois, you can see accurately how long the site has already existed. That doesn’t guarantee it will continue to exist, any more than PR does, but it is a more accurate figure.[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:20, topic:214632”]
For me it’s a pain to see such sites gone coz of spam.
[/quote]Indeed - which is why we try to discourage people from Spamming such sites for backlinks. As @molona has pointed out, the point of social media sites and social bookmarking sites is the social aspect - the sharing among like-minded people. These sites are not designed or intended to be used for self-promotion.

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:20, topic:214632”]
Actually, if I share my link on a site like digg, it’ll never ever ever even appear in internet, let alone survival.
[/quote]So don’t waste your time on this kind of activity. Concentrate on building quality content that other reputable sites will choose to link to. Find other ways of gaining backlinks.

Knowing all that then, why the focus on backlinks and where they can be placed? It sounds like a bit (a complete) waste of time. Why not put your efforts into what you can affect - the quality of your content?

Concentrate on building quality content that other reputable sites will choose to link to.

Why not put your efforts into what you can affect - the quality of your content?

-----> I can show you content developed by me, loved by world (including .edu) I have a fair idea how that works and you guys are 100% right… I would not deny that. In 2006-07 I coded a broken link checker script, it was loved by world, at that time, mine was one of the best in world, if not best. Later I let it go down due to server load, neither I developed it, nor I monetized it, was busy in some other projects. Indexing and crawling internet still remains one of my fav. subjects.

About a week back, I was able to catapult a site from almost zero to top 10 for one of the toughest keywords (impressions are dead low though) with a few 100% white hat tricks.

This is a human nature, it’s about exhilaration… it’s about more…

Unfortunately, we have gone far away from the goal of this thread… I really didn’t know the objective of this thread was so odd…

I still badly need what I’m looking for … Please gime some… I promise to return the favor … :smiley:

What does this tell you?

Google algorithms have changed.
The value of Page Rank has diminished.
SEO has changed.
Your methods must change too.
Building links for yourself is no longer an effective way to improve SERPs.

In may not be what you want to hear, but it’s the truth.
Pages with multiple “do follow” links won’t have good PR, why would they? Any tiny morsel of PR they may have that is passed from them if further diluted by the number of links on the page. Then the remaining dot of PR passed is further diluted by the fact Google is putting far less emphasis on the value of PR now than it used to. Why? Because they got sick of people using backlinks to play the system in this way and try to manipulate PR. They take a dim view of this behaviour, and it will no longer help your site. Unnatural link building is now a reward-less task now and more likely to harm you.

2 Likes

These change and evolve all the time. If they didn’t change, Google would not exist today. Core Algos have only become stronger.

I disagreeee… just coz we can’t achieve high PR doesn’t mean we should say so… Install a PR checker tool in your browser… see where Google is sending you… see the majority What is the PR of sites that you visit more than often?

Evolution is the key my friend, but, like I said… Google Core Algos that existed in late 90s have only become stronger. they just need to be followed more… It works like maths… as simple.

Only evolve with the passage of time… Core remains same.

Gime a respectable and worthy challenge, I’ll prove in days.

I wish I could explain more… I wish I could explain how much Google loves linking out… The more your page links out, more Google will love you… BUT, outgoing quality should be fair.

https://productforums.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!category-topic/webmasters/webmaster-tools/29GtmYDt8L0

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:25, topic:214632”]
I wish I could explain more… I wish I could explain how much Google loves linking out…
[/quote]I wish you could, with a Google reference to back it up, because I think you’re working on outdated models here. If you have a Google source to prove me wrong, I’d be happy to see it.

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:25, topic:214632”]
The more your page links out, more Google will love you…
[/quote]What Google loves most of all, and increasingly so, is high quality, unique content.

1 Like

Thanks for the update!

I remember Neil Patel explaining how imp. linking out is. Matt Cutts says same too:

In the same way that Google trusts sites less when they link to spammy sites or bad neighborhoods, parts of our system encourage links to good sites.

Google below and similar phrases you should find countless voices to support my point.

“link out” matt cutts
“linking out” matt cutts
“link out” some SEO expert name
“linking out” some SEO expert name

In 2016, I would never ever ever write an article without link outs.

No matter how good your content is, Google won’t care much unless it is popular… From popularity I mean back links… I suggest research on this and you’ll agree with me.

PS: I suggest you allow link out to wikipedia and equal PR sites here in this forum to improve SE rankings of your pages… I’m new here, not sure how much link out you allow.

Ever since web-spam started taking down good sites, site owners completely stopped link outs… I don’t know how to comment that practice… But, I strongly recommend linking out to high PR sites like wikipedia.

We are not hiding them from you.
They simply don’t exist any more. You said yourself:-

Why do you think this is?
It’s all the reasons I stated… that you disagree with.
Such sites are of little value today, hence they die, that is evolution.

Please explain to me how a page becomes “popular” if it does not have good content.

All links here are nofollow. We don’t allow links for links sake or self promotional links, that is considered spam. Links that are relevant and and add value to the topic are allowed in moderation. See the FAQ for more details.

Well, if you and other members don’t wanna share, I’ll share what I got from other sources:

Like I said in first post, high PR NF are good as long as the BL is visible in internet:

stumbleupon
delicious
FB Pages
plus.Google
Reddit

I’ll build this link and share for the welfare of fellas and my records…

PS: There maybe corrections later after further research and review. I’ll keep adding.

According to my research, social bookmarking sites like pligg been dying due to web spam.

I never said good content is not needed… BUT a fresh site with good content won’t pull traffic from Google or anywhere else. DIY experiment and you’ll agree with me.

I’m an SEO guy, I see, observe and analyse things that way. I gave an advise which I believe is good, backed by Google. It’s up to you guys whether you wanna follow it or not…

It’s kool if you don’t wanna change your policies.

Cheers!

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:27, topic:214632”]
Thanks for the update!
[/quote]You’re welcome - but it’s hardly an update. That post dates from 2009 - over six years ago - and yet still the message doesn’t seem to be getting through.

I don’t disagree at all about linking out, although I do it on the basis that Matt Cutts suggests - link to provide added value for my visitors. I don’t consider SEO when I link. But this is not the issue raised in your first post, which I do disagree with, about using social media and social bookmarking sites to link in to your site.

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:27, topic:214632”]
I suggest you allow link out to wikipedia and equal PR sites here in this forum to improve SE rankings of your pages… I’m new here, not sure how much link out you allow.

Ever since web-spam started taking down good sites, site owners completely stopped link outs…
[/quote]Google’s guidelines state that site owners should mark user-generated links over which they have no control (what Google calls “not editorially vouched-for”) as nofollow, to prevent their site being seen as link-farming and possibly penalised for it. So reputable sites follow these guidelines. It seems fair enough to me. A site owner should be able to differentiate between those sites they think highly of and have chosen to link to and be associated with, and those sites they know nothing about which somebody else may khave linked to in a blog comment or forum post.

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:29, topic:214632”]
Well, if you and other members don’t wanna share,
[/quote]You’re misreading what we’re saying. It is not that we “don’t want to share”, but simply that we do not have the information you are requesting, because you are using outdated techniques which we all consider to be a waste of our time and which we do not participate in.[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:29, topic:214632”]
I’ll share what I got from other sources:

Like I said in first post, high PR NF are good as long as the BL is visible in internet:

stumbleupon
delicious
FB Pages
plus.Google
Reddit

I’ll build this link and share for the welfare of fellas and my records…
[/quote]Please don’t.

As I said before, we don’t like such lists here as they are generally only of interest to those intent on Spamming. (I’m not accusing you of this, merely explaining why we prefer not to encourage such posts.) Additionally, such lists add the the ongoing misinformation which we spend a great deal of time here trying to counteract.

I know you have said in this and other posts that nofollow links from high PR pages are acceptable to you, but not everybody reads things carefully. Members will read the title of this topic, which asks for followed links, and they’ll see references to Facebook and Google+ and go away with the erroneous idea that these links are followed and these sites are a good way to build backlinks. We see this posted here repeatedly.

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:29, topic:214632”]
According to my research, social bookmarking sites like pligg been dying due to web spam.
[/quote]Again, that is the reason we don’t want to see lists here encouraging people to Spam other social sites.

[quote=“IT-INDIA.com, post:29, topic:214632”]
I gave an advise which I believe is good, backed by Google.
[/quote]I’m not quite sure what advice you’re referring to here. If you mean the advice to link out, then as I say, I quite agree with you. Linking out, done in accordance with Google’s guidelines, is beneficial.

If you are talking about gaining backlinks from social sites, which is the main subject of this thread, I stand by my earlier comments that it is not only a fruitless exercise, but also a misuse of such sites and not something which we wish to encourage.

1 Like

Can we close this thread? It’s gone light years away from the topic… I’ve discussed and shared as much as I could off topic… can’t do anymore…

Thanks for your cooperation!

That’s the thing. If they exist for the Internet or not is irrelevant. What matters is if you reach your potential client base. Being on the first page is nice because obviously your possibilities of getting new traffic of targeted people are higher… but that doesn’t mean that it is going to happen.

I’m sorry. I don’t think that we can give you what you want.

Again, I think that your whole approach is wrong. Of course, the purpose of anyone that builds a website is to be found and competition is fierce out there. But searching for any site with PR5 or above will not do much.

You don’t need to be everywhere, you don’t need to submit to every site except for a few search engines or directories, you don’t need to use every single social media.

First, because your target market is not using most of those sites, if any at all. You only need to be where your potential customers are. If they use FB, then use FB. If they use FB and twitter, you use FB and Twitter. If they use DIGG, you use DIGG. And it is absurd to submit to Google.com when all your customers visit Google.in

Second, because there are so many people wasting their time the way you do, that even if the links were do follow, you would get close to nil for your site. There are too many links sharing that juice. And Google doesn’t really care about them anymore.

Third because today’s world, and more at marketing level, what you need more than ever is connection with the people that are interested in what you have to offer. It is the way how you treat people now, and what you say, not so much how many backlink you have. Those will come with time.

Example: you don’t search for every single blog to post “nice” and your link. You read an article and, if you really have something intelligent to share, you write and then share your link. It doens’t matter if the page is PR0 or PR20.

If people sees you like an intelligent, sensible or creativer person, they may want to know more about what you do and will follow the link. If yoiu’re not interesting enough, they won’t.

I can’t give you a list because I don’t use one. The good news for me? I don’t need it

3 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.