The Social Impacts of Software Choices

Brad DeLong advocates a 'follow' tag rather than a 'nofollow' tag, which sounds like an easier way to accomplish what you're proposing.

Sort of, Rebecca -- a 'follow' tag would only be successful (loosely interpreted) if either the entire population of web-based authors both used it moving forward and went back to modify their old pages, or Google had a good way to know whether or not a page is a weblog (and thus knew to only enforce the 'follow' tag rules on those pages). Otherwise, Google and other participating search engines would purposely be shunning enormous bits of content and associations between various bits of content.

Anil, with respect, some corrections and observations:

"PageRank, when created, didn't assume that content on a web page, especially links, would be generated by someone other than the publisher of that page."

Actually, I think it did. If it didn't, then Larry and Sergey were foolish. We had forums and guest books and other publicly contributed content even back then. Heck, we had the entire publicly contributed Open Directory started.

"But there's also some resistance from real bloggers, who are fretting now that their comments won't confer PageRank on their blogs."

Which is a problem why? Why should "real" bloggers get more credit than someone who might comment and post on a blog with a link to non-blog content. I'm not talking spam. I'm talking about the idea that if bloggers are assuming the way to survive was to get comment links, ummm -- that's a distant but still related cousin to those who just slam bam try to get links.

If you have good content, comment. The person whose blog you comment on will likely refer to that in a follow up post. If not, others will see your comments and point to you. Respect on the web does not come (for bloggers or others) through getting links in comments.

"...feeling that their only shot at improving ranking is going away."

Again, this sounds very much like bloggers with an SEO complex. I need links for ranking? How about you write good stuff, and people will comment on it within their own posts that will help -- not that you need to be able to comment behind a post and get respect that isn't necessarily earned.

"PageRank is a currency in which you accept compensation. I haven't seen anybody advance that argument, which is disappointing."

And let's hope they don't. First of all, PageRank is just the popularity score. I can give you all the links you want -- if I don't use some decent anchor text in those links, not a lot of help to you. So it's not PageRank that's a currency -- it's relevant links.

Secondly, you need to compensate me for giving you comments? If my comments are useful, I get compensation (if I feel I need it) by people liking what I say and clicking on a link to learn more about me. Links actually do mean something other than getting search credit. Links are a way for people to move between sites and discover things. I also get compensation by simply feeling I'm contributing to the conversation on the web. And frankly, if someone's assuming they deserve anything for commenting, let's get the New York Times to start sending out checks to letter writers.

Comment on a blog deserves compensation? Hey -- it's your ink. You're letting me share my view on your ink. Thanks -- no need to pay me in links, cash or otherwise.

"Robots.txt evolved over a long period of time, and still isn't really built into publishing tools."

Robots.txt evolved between 1995-96 and has pretty much been left abandoned since. In fact, one annoying thing about the entire nofollow situation is that the blogging community has helped push for something that isn't a cure all for comment spam and isn't necessarily the most important things search engines should have started with.

Hey, I like that we have it. I've asked for the same thing recently before. Kudos that they've done it. But go back to robots.txt. It's still a not flexible way to block spidering. Fixing that would have many more real changes to site owners than nofollow. Nofollow is NOT going to eliminate the need to have other types of blog spam prevention tools, as Six Apart's own good guide illustrates. But bloggers screamed loud, so they got a reaction. I'm just heartened that after years of search engines not giving web authors anything, maybe this is a start to getting more.

"Brad Choate thought about this stuff 3 years ago...if you are one of those folks who's a stickler for crediting inventiveness, it's worth linking to Brad."

Yes he did -- and I gave him plenty of it as a poster child of why web authors of all flavors need more for search engines in my Comment Spam? How About An Ignore Tag? (http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/050105-055807) post earlier this month.

" … a comment that includes a link shouldn't be filtered out. Most of the people advancing this argument are saying it because of some obtuse "the rich get richer" feeling that their only shot at improving ranking is going away. Get over it, shlubs. Real ranking comes from people linking to you in their posts, anyway, so write stuff that's worth linking to and promote it well."

Anil, I'm an otherwise happy TypePad user — but not happy that this 'nofollow' initiative has been foisted on us with no consultation. I am currently of the same mind as John Battelle: undecided! I certainly feel that getting noticed on the web is very, very hard and making comments where I can link to postings that I've made is one way of trying to get noticed. To take your toughly (?) worded second point ('get over it, shlubs' — I'm in the UK and unsure what a 'shlub' is, but it certainly sounds uncompromising): I wouldn't link to a post of mine unless I felt I had something to say! (I thought that that, done responsibly — I hardly ever use comments to link to specific postings on my blog — was to 'promote it well'.) It was then good to think that as well as being links for people to follow up who were reading the post I was commenting on, search engines might pick up on my link and feed a little more traffic my way — and more conversation might result. Now, I just have to hope that (browsers of the original post that drew my comment apart) someone stumbles across that piece I wrote on my site. Some hope.

Sometimes, when you're tired and it's late, this great thing, the web, looks awfully like a closed space where a set of groups whose members know each other talk and the rest of us, the great mass of users, get to listen in. This initiative might reinforce this position (if, indeed, my midnight/2am perception is realistic) and I think the consequences should first have been debated openly — with the punters, the customers, the users. Of course, I might be utterly wrong, my fears unfounded, etc — but the bridge has been crossed and, if our fears turn out to be justified, I don't suppose there'll be any going back, will there?

Last word to John: 'what bothers me is that there may well be an ecology that evolves based on the link mojo in comments which we can't imagine, but that would be important and wonderful, and that will not develop if every comment has a tag telling search engines to ignore it. Like it or not, search engines are now processors of our collective reality, and fiddling with that requires some contemplation'.

:: ...'follow' tag would only be successful (loosely interpreted) if ... Google had a good way to know whether or not a page is a weblog... ::

not so hard. anything with the address foo.blogspot.com, foo.typepad.com, foo.livejournal.com, www.foo.com/mt/, www.foo.com/blogger/, etc is easy to identify as a weblog. for the rest of us, it would be easy for google to look for a metatag of some sort in the headers that would indicate "I am a weblog".

Without meaning any disrespect towards Brad at all (it's easy enough for two people to have the same good idea, after all), the basic concept has prior art dating as far back as 1/26/2001 in FDSE, a shareware site search engine by Zoltan Milosevic that I used to use.

Being able to block off areas of my site from the search engine (such as the sidebar of my weblog, which changes often thanks to blogrolls and linklogs and such) came in _very_ handy for me when I was using it. I'd love to have this functionality again, especially with the major search engines.

There have been quite a few entries I've wanted to comment on, but didn't want to register with TypeKey.
But todays entry is different, it gave me a reason to register.

my idea is to have an entire user be "verified", and then they are, the blogging software would not apply the nofollow tag. This takes the 'money' out of the bloggers hands directly, and puts it in a central place. For example, if people like this comment, and I got on another typekey blog and comment there - good as well. Then after a while, I got verified, and then by contributing to the blog I post to, I get more "juice".

the reason reg'g for TK is apropros to this discussion - I wanted to see if it asked me for a url in my profile :)

I expect blog software companies to provide a way to manage comments to remove the nofollow attribute from a given poster's comments.

I would like to browse my comments and deign certain ones to be of value. Click. Now they don't have the nofollow attribute.

Preferably there would be a way to identify registered or TypeKey users and on an individual basis deign that all comments by that user should be linked normally.

> Therefore, you should be compensated for your contribution, and PageRank is a currency in which
> you accept compensation. I haven't seen anybody advance that argument, which is disappointing.

Perhaps it's because you haven't read enough 'F-list' blogs? :D (heh heh, I love that goofy descriptor, but can't take credit from it. I read it from, uh, some F-List blog.)

I previously advanced the argument this way:

> From a selfish perspective, I believe that I've contributed quite a few thoughtful comments to
> many blogs, and frankly, I welcome and appreciate the Google whuffie that I earn for my
> blog. Forgive my sense of entitlement here, but when I'm contributing to the content of the Web,
> why shouldn't my *own* little corner of the Web gain a bit from my efforts?

I think I'd feel at least a little bit better about the no-follow tag if the blogger authors and typepad folks (Hi Anil!) made it *easy* for the blog owners to confer page rank upon comments on an individual basis, or at least automatically conferred page rank on authenticated comments.

But on the whole, I still feel that the no-follow idea is a kludgy bandaid that will embolden, rather than deter spammers. And I feel that I and many others as non-A-Listers were certainly not consulted in -- or (perhaps our own fault) even aware of any of these discussions :|

> some F-List blog

I'll take credit for that:

http://www.baus.net/socialseed
http://www.baus.net/nomination

BTW I think this is a bad idea. There is validity in negative publicity.

For instance if I want information on a hate group for a research project, I might want links to the group's site to matter in its page rank so I can find them, even if few actually agree with its pricipals. Something can be negative and relevant, that's what people are forgetting.

As soon as this was announced Scoble immediately said he was going to use this to mark up links other than those from his comments page. So this will be used for purposes other than stopping comment spammers. My guess is that this is going to fail. And by that I mean it will have 0 effect on comment spam. Google wants this for other reasons. They think it will make their search more relevant (I think they are wrong, but that's another story), and they are trying to get the blog community to follow along with them, and you did.

I don't think they really believe it will actually cut down on comment spam.

I agree with the concept you assert behind you statement “your comment, being cogent and articulate, increases the value of the page it's on. Therefore, you should be compensated for your contribution” But I might take it from a slightly different angle. The interaction between bloggers and commenter should be like the social interaction in the real world. My brother-in-law is an intellectual property rights lawyer. He gives free speeches and seminars to entrepreneurs who have a vested interest in the subject. Both he and they know he does it to try to get new clients. When at the end of his discussion he hands out cards no one storms off disgusted at the thought that he was marketing to them. On the web on the other hand if you leave even a simple link like area rugs [Note: I removed Paul's link. -- Anil] in a post that is applicable or even helpful, the post or link is often mediated out. People watch free TV shows and put up with commercials and product placement because they get something out of it. I am very surprised by how people’s reactions in the real world differ from their reactions online. The web is still in its infancy and has a lot of maturing to do so we still see a lot of over reaction to marketing online but I am sure as it ages we will see the market place relax.

I am researching on pagerank and I think that really "nofollow" is an effective way to combat spam. What is the correct form?

Awesome notice about seo. I'm honestly dumbstruck that this has not been articulated earlier.