The site owners have presumably seen the ranking power achieved by

[zihadhasan012]

Wikipedia nofollowing all outbound links and are trying to form their very own black hole. Lack of trust My understanding of the original intent of proffering nofollow as a solution to the problem of linking to untrusted places was that it was mainly intended for situations like blog comments, profile links, etc., where users of your site could create links to wherever they pleased. This is definitely valuable (as anyone who has ever had to moderate blog comments can attest) but what about once you do trust the commenter? Since so many sites have no mechanism whereby that nofollow is ever removed, we end up in a situation where people are creating huge amounts of really valuable content and the links they create are nofollow.


In my opinion, some of the most "valuable" link list of egypt cell phone numbers s on the internet at the moment are nofollow. Some examples: The average quality of outbound links from Wikipedia is incredibly high Many people are leaving their RSS feed readers untouched and getting their news via links their friends drop on Twitter We know many sites whose biggest sources of traffic after search are links which happen to be nofollow (leading to interesting discussion of the effects on the random surfer model) After posting my provocative theory on Twitter this morning, I asked people to


show me some great links via the #nofollowisdead hashtag and I found some things I really wanted to read, including: A mention of me I hadn't seen before! From Carlos del Rio (whose book, User Driven Change, is out now - I read it when it was still a draft and I highly recommend it) All customers are liars (warning: some strong language!) via Wiep Possibly the coolest new blog I've seen in some time - 1000 Awesome Things via Hannah Obviously this is a dreadful test, but I think it is a strong example - I find many of the most interesting things I read every day via my network.