My immediate reaction was that it’s way better than using some comment link redirect script to hide the URLs from search engines, and I still think it is. The redirect idea was a really bad solution.

However, I’m not sure that the choice of link type name is a good one. Reading the W3C specs I guess that a better link type name would be something like “irrelevant”.

My current blog host, TypePad, implemented the nofollow feature immediately. Nice, but at present I’ve got no spam and have no need for nofollow links. I was very surprised when I was told there was no way to turn of the feature. There’s apparently an on switch, but no off switch.

The nice people from TypePad tech support did mention that an off switch may be developed, but reading the post by Anil Dash that’s linked in update 2 of this post I’m not so sure an off switch is planned.

I don’t mind whether the links in comments I make to other peoples blogs are typed nofollow, but I do mind when my blog host turns into BOFH and I lose control over my own website.

I still think link types may be useful, but I’m still not sure that the nofollow link type issue as it’s being handled is a good idea.

Your concern about search engines not indexing comments is unfounded. That only happens if you use nofollow for the link to the comment page. Google doesn’t recommend that. They only suggest you use it for user generated links. Here’s the relevant text from Google’s post on nofollow:

Q: Should I put rel=”nofollow” on the link to my comments page?

A: Probably not, because lots of interesting discussion can happen there. Also, if other people link to your comments page, a spider can follow that link and find any spam that’s lurking on the comments page.

The best places to add this attribute are the actual links that other people can create.

That said, using nofollow still does discourgage discussion in the sense that an extra benefit of commenting [boost to your pagerank] has been taken away. However, the content of your comment will still be findable through search engines.

those interested may see the full code here

HTH,
T.I.B.

Courtesy of http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2005-01-19-n34.html

Finally, an non-passive authority metric can be born! Imagine the fun, the new arguments over link whoring, virtual stock markets, discussions on power curves in whuffie currency markets and self-congratulating armchair revolutions we could have!

The blog tool publishers though are full of shit when they peddle this as even a mild cure for comment spam. Their assumption of some rational testing method (“I will not spam this site for it gives no PageRank”) is simply not supported by the evident behaviour. Consider email spam for no longer available sites, referrer spam when referrers are not published, zombie spam machines with out-of-date target lists etc etc

I’m also wondering whether giving webmasters control over the direction of bots outside their domain is really the best way to build “better” search results.

Consider: When discussing, say, a Nazi site people use the nofollow attribute to stop a search engine giving the site “credit” (PageRank or whatever).

Fine, you may say – I don’t want my voice to give those whom I disagree with a more visible platform.

Yet, is the search engine doing us a favour by effectively censoring the counter-argument perhaps contained within that site?

Now, I’ve picked an example I’m sure few people will want to defend but think about it when its applied to something less universally reviled but still an (Internet) minority opinion.

Is this the beginning of the reverse- (or anti-) google bomb?

Does this also allow the head of the power curve to dictate the reality of the web by giving them an effective veto over the search engines results?

Also am I alone in finding a link you’re not supposed to follow an innately funny concept? I mean why not just kill the hyperlink or not show it all?

I’m expecting the next great announcement to be “Spam Problem Solved: Internet Shuts Down.”

Your reply to M

“If as a commentator on someone’s blog, you know that you’re spending ten, twenty, or more minutes crafting a response, and that response – because it lives in someone’s comments field – will be ignored by the conferrers of future societal attention (ie – search indexes) – then I can imagine many folks will simply avoid writing thoughtful responses in comemnts altogether. Instead, they’ll post on their own site. It seems that one of the things No Follow will do – subtley or not – is discourage active and intelligent dialog on a post. That is not, to my mind, a good thing.”

Is that what this global conversation for you (and others, relying on their comments) was all the time? Participating for the benefit of PageRank? Audiences? Maybe for that sake i should have posted in my blog, or maybe i should speek only according to a market strategy for myself, or maybe what i thought since the begining was all wrong. I tought that we were all being part of a global conversation, extending ideas, making connections to exchange views, to grow and foster ideas, to learn…

Guess i must have misunderstand what you have explained, guess i have it all wrong… and if that is so, i’m glad.

One of your long time readers,

M

Separately, I wouldn’t worry about “post-PageRank relevance schema.” We all have to come back by and re-crawl this stuff to use it anyway. The truly post-PageRank crowd will capture the nofollow tag, use it as information, and crawl what lives behind the link anyway.