Hello,
I have been using social bookmarking sites and articles to get traffic. I read some posts in this forum that posting comments on blogs is a good method to get traffic too.
So, I am looking for a list of blogs to submit comments.
Does anyone know any site that contains a this blog list?
Thanks,
Have a nice day!
Where did you search? http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=do+follow+diver
First result is http://www.inlineseo.com/dofollowdiver/, which gives a searchable index of ‘dofollow’ blogs. Along with a somewhat optimistic message “Please do not spam”. As if… 
Please tell me what is Do Follow Diver?
I was search for that but not found any thing useful for me.
you can check backlinks of your site competitors =D
Whoever said that was wrong and misleading.
Don’t bother - you’ll just get canned as spam and annoy the website owner (put the shoe on the other foot)
No.
You too 
Yep totally agree.
Making myself a facebook page to promote my website might indirectly improve my SERP positions because some people might read it, like it, go to my site and decide to link to it and Google are fine with that because I would have earned those backlinks for having a genuinely useful resource. That’s completely different from ninja link building.
I’m glad I don’t have Matt CUtt’s job, trying to tell a natural ranking profile from a manipulated one can’t be easy.
You’re just repeating your original rebuttals so there’s no way to reply to that without repeating myself which I can’t be bothered to do and in any case I can tell when I’m not going to change someone’s mind so you do your thing, I’ll do mine. Put in your H1s and a nice Title and all your other on-page signals and believe that you’re doing SEO.
I agree on your stance towards good practice web design/development. But your second paragraph ignores the real need for promotion - “build it and they will come” simply doesn’t work in the real world. So I can see how you’d think that some online activities to increase traffic/rank is spamming - but the rest falls within legitimate promotion of a product and/or service. Just the way it’s the same in the off-line world - some drop rubbish “promotional” material in your letterbox (spam), others pay for radio/tv advertising…It’s a subjective line…
Oh well you’ve been around longer, read more, debated with people in the know, and done some “actual” SEO so your opinion must be more “evolved” than everyone else here. I reckon we’d be inclined to listen to your more if your weren’t so arrogant.
Nope, wrong.
You’re allowed to do things intended to increase your rankings. In fact, Google want you to. That’s why they keep offering advice on how to optimise your site, not just make it crawlable and indexable.
Google want their product to return the most relevant results to searchers, which is why they provide advice specifically designed to help you improve your rankings…which in turn provides more traffic. You seem to have lost the connection between those two things.
I’m always open to being budged, what I should have said is that I think it’s unlikely to happen in this particular debate because I once held the same opinions as you guys and I’ve moved on to what I believe is a more advanced understanding of how Google think and what they want (IMHO…:P)
Google want us to build well structured pages that are semantically coded so that they can easily crawl and index them and understand the content well enough to decide where they should rank (hence the deceivingly named ‘SEO’ guide). So that’s all the stuff you were talking about, what I consider as the work that makes pages ‘search engine friendly’ and it needs to be done sure, but any competent web designer should be doing that even for sites that aren’t worried about ranking well, it’s just good practice.
But… what they don’t want us to do is artificially improve our rankings by manipulating ranking signals like backlinks and that’s the stuff that gets the traffic and because I consider SEO to be about improving traffic volumes and quality it’s that stuff that is the real SEO and it’s spamming, no two ways about it. Instead of letting my page rank naturally where it deserves to, I artificially bump it up and that’s reducing the quality of their product, the SERP, because the SERP isn’t being allowed to naturally and organically sort itself out so the quality stuff floats to the top, it’s being manipulated by people who understand how it works.
Sorry if I’m labouring the point.
I have a better understanding of your opinion now with that elaboration, and you’re certainly entitled to hold and express that opinion. It would be easier to continue the debate if you were more open to “being budged”, so for now, since our perspectives and “understanding” are different - I hope we can agree to disagree
It’s not a good idea to just randomly post on blogs. For the most part, people will end up spamming your comments anyways. EARN traffic, don’t create it.
that’s the main problem with your attitude - why do you have to attack this person rather than help them to better their strategy*? Obviously, the person has learned said strategy right here in the forum and not anywhere else.
Sorry, in my opinion, while you have a right to be annoyed and irritated, you don’t and should not show it in such a disrespectful manner, not as a Sitepoint Mentor, but who am I to judge? Well, Sitepoint’s forums has been going downhill for some time now, and that’s just one of the things wrong with it.
The post was made in the SEO forum, so I assume it is about SEO. If it isn’t about SEO then it should be in a different forum, so I stand by my right to be annoyed and irritated by it.
Second, spamming is spamming, whether you’re doing it for SEO or direct traffic. And asking for a list of blogs to comment on with no reference to the topic or field of interest is either gross stupidity or intention to spam, so again I stand by my right to be annoyed and irritated.
you’re definitely in a bad mood, and - no offence - but I think you misread the OP’s post to some extent, after all, the OP’s asking for blogs and not forums, and didn’t ask for SEO implications but strictly as a method to get traffic - he/she asked for SEO implications of social bookmarking sites in other threads, so I assume he/she knows a bit about that by now.
I’m stuck using dialup because my broadband router has gone down, so I’m in a bad mood. The answer to your question is: “Next time you wipe your @rse, look at the paper you’ve used. That tells you what you need to know about your strategy”
Spamming open forums is (a) pointless, (b) counterproductive, and (c) the behaviour of scum.
(a) - any open forum that allows “dofollow” links is going to be spammed by billions of other scum as well, so you won’t get any link juice from it. If it doesn’t allow “dofollow” links than you’re getting absolutely nothing.
(b) - most open forums that allow “dofollow” links are dodgy as hell, and Google knows that. If you associate with sites like that, Google will assume you’re dodgy as hell too. And if you’re cluster-bombing any forums you can find, there will be no coherence to your links so Google won’t have a clue what your site is about.
(c) - Sitepoint is a forum for web professionals and amateurs to improve their skills and strategy, it is not a place for lowlife, spammers and scum. If you’re just here to get us to do your dirty work, you won’t get any help from us.
In what way is making a site more search-engine friendly, and making it easier to crawl and index accurately not “optimising it for search engines”? Making your site more search-engine friendly, so that it gets accurately indexed and appears in relevant searches, will increase targeted traffic, and that (for any reputable website) is the aim. Increasing overall traffic just pushes up your bandwidth costs, that’s not a good thing - you need to ensure that you’re getting appropriate traffic, that’s where you get the business from, and that’s what SEO should be all about.
There’s no such thing as ‘white hat’ and ‘black hat’, there’s only techniques which work long term and short term.
I would say that “white hat” techniques are typically those that will increase your relevant, targeted traffic, and “black hat” techniques are generally those that will increase generic traffic, typically through misrepresentation and misdirection.
Ever gone out a deliberately tried to get a backlink that will improve your rankings? You’re a spammer. Never done that? You’re not an SEO.
We might have to agree to disagree here, because there’s no way I can accept what you are saying, and it doesn’t sound like you’re going to budge either…
though keep in mind a few things:
Well you see that’s why I was at pains to clearly define what I consider SEO to be and the stuff you’re talking about falls outside that definition and into the box that I label as ‘Search Engine Friendly’. Our opinions are bound to differ if we can’t agree what SEO actually is.
Imagine this though, imagine that Google don’t want us to do SEO because it sullies the quality of their product, can you see how clever it would be to release a ‘guide’ that gives us their definition of SEO and conveniently doesn’t include any of the things that they don’t want us to do? In fact all it does is make life easier for them. It’s the quality of their product that’s at stake, a little bit of misdirection is certainly within their game plan.
If Google could stop you building a natural looking backlink profile which will fool their algo into ranking you well because they think they’re genuinely earned backlinks they would do that too and then you could call that ‘black hat’ too…
You’re right and the reason is that I was once where you and seriocomic are but my opinion evolved to where it is now through what I believe is a greater understanding of how the people at Google think with help from engaging in numerous debates on these issues with very knowledgable people like Stymiee and Aspen and people on other forums and attending Google webinars and lots of reading and of course actually doing SEO. It’s not going to devolve now.
You have to understand that Google wants sites/pages to rank well because they deserve to and not because some clever person got the site some good backlinks. Anytime you do something intended to increase your rankings (which is not the same as being crawlable and indexable) you’re doing something they don’t want you to do and it’s the job of their anti-spam team to catch people artificially boosting their own rankings. SEO is spamming.
Thanks for the link but I read it when it came out in 2008. Show me in their guide where it helps you get more traffic? No… can’t find anything? I’ll tell you why, that ‘SEO guide’ is actually a guide to building a well constructed website so that Google can crawl it and decide how to rank it without any problems but it won’t help you rank well or increase your traffic and the only reason they called it an ‘SEO’ guide is because they knew all the muppets would eagerly flock to read it and follow Google’s instructions on how to build a website which they would never have done if it was called ‘A guide to building a well structured website’… clever aren’t they.
I get Google mate and I’m trying to help you get them.
No, it’s much more narrow
All the things you mentioned are just making your sites more search engine friendly, less likely to cause indexing or crawling probelms etc, none of them actually increase traffic. An SEO needs to know how to do those things even though any competent website developer should already have done them but none of them are how you get good rankings for competitive keywords. To contrive to do that for a site that isn’t doing it naturally you have to game the system.
There’s no such thing as ‘white hat’ and ‘black hat’, there’s only techniques which work long term and short term.
Ever gone out a deliberately tried to get a backlink that will improve your rankings? You’re a spammer. Never done that? You’re not an SEO.