Are link farms actually bad?

Selected answers from the Dumb SEO Questions Facebook & G+ community.

• 
  Stephen Kaufman: Google says one thing but does another
  
  1d
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Stephen Kaufman that`s my suspicion. I`m starting to get the feeling this is like what I found happening on Instagram. Officially, `bots` are against the terms of service and will get you blocked. Countless blogs are full of lame articles about `just producing great content`. Ok. In reality, every managed account has a bot automatically liking hashtagged posts, following/unfollowing accounts and commenting emojis. Open your phone and watch someone`s account like 8 posts every few seconds. They would have to be on Instagram all day every day. It`s a bot. It`s clear, it`s against the TOS, yet it`s happening on every major account in plain sight... a bit like these links.
  
  16h
• 
  Stephen Kaufman: Christy Bannerman yup, i don`t think google has the means nor resources to find these on their own and rely on disavow`s to identify them
  
  13h
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Stephen Kaufman I find that weird though. If you wrote a little program to detect unnatural `link density`, as an obvious indicator of fraud, it would instantly flag all these sites because it`s just link after link after link. There`s literally no other text, lol.
  
  12h
• 
  Stephen Kaufman: Christy Bannerman smart “link farms” write ai pages with text that appears natural and backlink to your site from the article, at least the ones i use do. I think that makes it very difficult to spot.
  
  11h
• 
  Ash Nallawalla: I have worked at large companies where SEO had been outsourced long before I arrived to be an in-house SEO. Those link providers had delivered such links, many of which were still intact. Today, you might look at my past employers and wonder why they have such links. At least in my example, the SEO was outsourced by people who only needed to tick a box and be assured that traffic was improving.
  
  1d
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Ash Nallawalla that was one of my hypotheses, so thanks for confirming. It would seem then that buying these kind of links is an extremely common practice from most SEO agencies.
  
  16h
• 
  Karlton Kemerait: Maybe depends on how tocix google views the source of those links .. i`ve seen some with pretty low toxicity
  
  1d
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Karlton Kemerait Bizarrely these sites have quite a high Domain Rating on Ahrefs backlink checker. Like this - https://worldwidetopsite.com/website-list-2405/ - scores 61. I don`t understand.
  
  WORLDWIDETOPSITE.COMwebsite list 2405 |website list 2405 |
  
  16h
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Karlton Kemerait Bizarrely these sites have quite a high Domain Rating on Ahrefs backlink checker. I don`t understand.
  
  16h
• 
  Roger Montti: Just because you see those backlinks, does not mean that those backlinks are responsible for the rankings.
  
  https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-and.../299389/
  
  SEARCHENGINEJOURNAL.COMJohn Mueller on Why Google Ranks Sites with Spammy LinksJohn Mueller on Why Google Ranks Sites with Spammy Links
  
  1d
• 
  Stephen Kaufman: Roger Montti so basically he says ctr manipulation works, and disavow buttons are for snitches.
  
  1d
• 
  Roger Montti: Stephen Kaufman What??? That`s not in the article.
  
  Just read the article.
  
  1d
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Roger Montti In spite of, not because of, I can understand that. However, is it really just coincidence that I`m consistently finding these sites backlinking to the top 3-5 of results? I`m sure these sites have other redeeming features. But are those backlinks getting them up there to be seen in the first place?
  
  16h
• 
  Christy Bannerman: No that`s not far fetched that`s exactly what im finding, to my surprise
  
  12h
• 
  Michael Martinez: Technically, a "link farm" is any group of Websites that all link to each other (for the sake of improving search engine performance). The original link farms used specially designated "reciprocal link" pages. Hundreds of sites would exchange links with each other.
  
  Anything other than that may be a "link scheme" but it`s not a "link farm".
  
  Are actual "link farms" bad? Absolutely. Google handed out manual actions (penalties) for them right and left - about 20 years ago. I haven`t seen a bona fide link farm since then.
  
  Other link schemes may be ignored or action may be taken against egregious violators. Things are much more nuanced than they were 20 years ago.
  
  1d
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Michael Martinez thanks for the clarification. What would you call the type of site I described? Here`s an example - https://worldwidetopsite.com/website-list-2405/. It seems like the top 3-5 sites of almost any niche feature a bunch of links from sites exactly like that, and I`m scratching my head as to how these are not instantly recognised as bad. Any ideas?
  
  WORLDWIDETOPSITE.COMwebsite list 2405 |website list 2405 |
  
  16h
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Michael Martinez thanks for the clarification. What would you call the type of site I described? It seems like the top 3-5 sites of almost any niche feature a bunch of links from sites exactly like this, and I`m scratching my head as to how these are not instantly recognised as bad. Any ideas?
  
  16h
• 
  Michael Martinez: Christy Bannerman People use all sorts of sites for links.
  
  If you`re concerned about what the search engines think about a site`s backlink profile, there`s only one question you need to answer for any given link: was it created for the purpose of manipulating search engine results?
  
  If the answer is "yes", then it`s spam, forbidden by the guidelines, and it doesn`t matter where it was placed (except for internal links - they`re not considered spam).
  
  14h
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Michael Martinez Every actively gained link is to manipulate search results, let`s be real.
  
  13h
• 
  Michael Martinez: Christy Bannerman Trust me, that`s not the case. But too many people in the SEO community have passed around aggressive linking strategies without considering the consequences (or they just downplay the consequences).
  
  Anyway, now it sounds to too many people like "that`s the way it is". And that`s only the way it is for a minority of content producers.
  
  9h
• 
  Christy Bannerman: Michael Martinez how is that not the case? The only links that are not deliberately manipulating search are those gained 100% naturally. Any time you actively seek out a backlink, whether it is paid for or not, you are doing so for the purpose of ranking higher. Seems you are saying the only legitimate linking strategy is waiting for your site to be linked organically? I`m all for great content, but scrupulously adhering to Google`s stated guidelines, while everyone else solicits backlinks, seems like starting the race 100m behind everyone else.
  
  8h
• 
  Mubarak Umar: Christy Bannerman is.gd/uff1pi
  
  T.MEJoin group chat on TelegramJoin group chat on Telegram
  
  6h
• 
  Michael Martinez: Christy Bannerman Not everyone who actively gains links is trying to manipulate search results.
  
  "Any time you actively seek out a backlink, whether it is paid for or not, you are doing so for the purpose of ranking higher."
  
  Nope. Lots of people ask for links with no intention of influencing search results.
  
  Web marketers comprise a tiny percentage of Internet users, most of whom know nothing and care less about search engine rankings.
  
  3h
• 
  Emad Gnawi: Just run awayI`m struggling with 2 clients to recover their ranking after unilateral decision form their side to buy those links !
  
  15h
• 
  David Morgan: I like to say this a lot, there`s no such thing as bad backlinks just bad strategies. What does that mean? You will find just as much hurt from what`s deemed a good link as you would a bad link if you have a poor strategy.
  
  The question I ask is, how do I use it to my advantage?
  
  14h