<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Google Shouldn&#8217;t Discriminate Against Paid Links</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theorganicseo.com/seo-industry/why-google-shouldnt-discriminate-against-paid-links.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theorganicseo.com/seo-industry/why-google-shouldnt-discriminate-against-paid-links.html</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:16:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Admin</title>
		<link>http://www.theorganicseo.com/seo-industry/why-google-shouldnt-discriminate-against-paid-links.html/comment-page-1#comment-119</link>
		<dc:creator>Admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:05:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theorganicseo.com/?p=111#comment-119</guid>
		<description>I think you missed the point of the post, which is that it isn&#039;t hard to disguise a paid link. Link brokers can provide server-side scripting that doesn&#039;t leave a footprint, and only an ignoramus would have a box that says &quot;sponsor links&quot;. Of course it&#039;s easy for Google to spot a paid link if you make it obvious.

BTW - There aren&#039;t any TLA&#039;s in this post which just goes to emphasize the point that if you as a human being can&#039;t recognize whether a link is a paid link or not, then how is Google going to do it programmatically?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you missed the point of the post, which is that it isn&#8217;t hard to disguise a paid link. Link brokers can provide server-side scripting that doesn&#8217;t leave a footprint, and only an ignoramus would have a box that says &#8220;sponsor links&#8221;. Of course it&#8217;s easy for Google to spot a paid link if you make it obvious.</p>
<p>BTW &#8211; There aren&#8217;t any TLA&#8217;s in this post which just goes to emphasize the point that if you as a human being can&#8217;t recognize whether a link is a paid link or not, then how is Google going to do it programmatically?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PoopyPeePee</title>
		<link>http://www.theorganicseo.com/seo-industry/why-google-shouldnt-discriminate-against-paid-links.html/comment-page-1#comment-118</link>
		<dc:creator>PoopyPeePee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theorganicseo.com/?p=111#comment-118</guid>
		<description>Wow, that was a really suckie, link stuffed article with incorrect information and on top of that outdated! Of course Google can tell a paid link..... when there&#039;s a footprint from a link broker or a box with a bunch of irrelevant links that says sponsor links! I mean, DUH!!! Nice job smoothly squeezing in your two Client&#039;s tla&#039;s too, great relevancy of a topic for the both of them. HAHAHA!

Learn something. It&#039;s called custom link building.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, that was a really suckie, link stuffed article with incorrect information and on top of that outdated! Of course Google can tell a paid link&#8230;.. when there&#8217;s a footprint from a link broker or a box with a bunch of irrelevant links that says sponsor links! I mean, DUH!!! Nice job smoothly squeezing in your two Client&#8217;s tla&#8217;s too, great relevancy of a topic for the both of them. HAHAHA!</p>
<p>Learn something. It&#8217;s called custom link building.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
