Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I have a very similar situation to Limens. Are you guys saying that i should have sites such as: http://goo.gl/RxU9M & http://goo.gl/AbUKV redirected (via a 301 redirect ) to my main site which is: http://goo.gl/JgK1e  ? If the answer is yes, should they be redirected to the home page (http://goo.gl/JgK1e) or to the specific pages they are about such as http://goo.gl/oiEeG & http://goo.gl/7nA9E Sorry if this got a little confusing.  Thanks in advance for any advice you guys may have...

Every Link is not necessarily counted.... If the Blog comment was a nofollow outside of his niche, and on a completely irrelevant subject, it can't necessarily "hurt" but it sure wont help. Maybe back in the days when Authority was based solely on the amount of links or Page Rank. But sorry, from a long term Internet Marketing and Strategy perspective it is a waste of money to get 60% Nofollow blog comments, especially since it was done by someone who there is no idea what he was posting. So maybe if you just want to make your clients do good for a few weeks or even months, but as a longterm strategy paying someone to do this is a wasted effort in the grand scheme/big picture. Where you are correct, a link is a link in the fact that someone looking for a service may see the post and if it is genuine and on topic you may get residual traffic, or even a conversion. But as a strict link building tactic... It is very weak and money could be alloted to other places for more return on investment. It is not always about just gaining links... it is about Return on the money invested. SO in the aspect of return, it was a waste of money, but sure your right, he gained a few links.....

We use several tools to track our backlinks: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org http://ahrefs.com http://www.majesticseo.com

To the best of my understanding, adding the rel="noreferrer" attribute to an <a>tag (i.e. attaching it to a link) just means that you don't want the user's referrer information (e.g. what browser, operating system, etc. he/she is using) to get passed along. </a> <a>My guess is that it has more to do with privacy, rather than SEO. From a search marketing standpoint, I wouldn't spend too much time thinking about it, if at all.</a>

Ryan nails all of the basic issues, so I will just add something: When I went to the site, having never heard of GetSatisfaction.com, for whatever reason my eyes went to kiddiecare and Pampers logos first. I immediately thought it was some type of aggregator of children's items for moms. Then, I was drawn to Start A Community today. Soooo, what Ryan says is correct regarding "no clear message." Given your client list and your DA and PA, you seem to have something to sell, but I don't think many people would know what that is from visiting the site. Ignoring the slider, the three buttons below are: Get Satisfaction for Facebook, The Age of the Customer, and Sometimes Size Does Matter. With everything on the page, you may be trying to give too many messages. I would clean it up to one or two coherent ideas and then use menu tabs and internal links to bring in the rest. Hope this helps,

I like this analysis and recommendation. The only other thing I would say (if it's a page) is drop the trailing slash on the recommended URL to this: domain.com/cooking/lasagna That makes it clear it's a page as opposed to a directory, and it also looks cleaner to the human eye. Here's some more complete discussion on the trailing slash topic: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/04/to-slash-or-not-to-slash.html 

I would like to add one point many people forget - disclosure. Google is pretty forgiving in terms of linking of own websites if the disclosure is clearly stated and it doesn't look like an SEOs attempt to manipulate link signals. My suggestion is to link to your other site via a specific page on your first site and explain their relationship. This is a good practice in general, not just search engines.

I'm afraid I have to generally agree with Dejan SEO. First off, the evidence that .edu and .gov links are really valued higher (at least over the last couple of years) is limited at best. SEOmoz did a correlation analysis in 2010 that suggested .gov links only slightly outperformed .com, and .edu under-performed .com - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/google-vs-bing-correlation-analysis-of-ranking-elements Part of that may be due to the fact that higher education sites have been relentlessly spammed. It's just too easy to set up a profile on a deep page and get a cheap .edu link. That's the core problem, too. In general, a .gov or .edu site may have more trust or authority than the average .com (although I can't even prove that). That doesn't mean, though, that EVERY link on a .edu is worth more than EVERY link on a .com. That's a gross oversimplification that ignores the dozens of factors that define a link's value. See Rand's post here: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/10-illustrations-on-search-engines-valuation-of-links If you have a deep link on a .edu site on a page with no inbound links that links out to 400 sites, all of which are irrelevant and spammy, that link will be crap. It doesn't matter that it's on a .edu. That page may not even be indexed. Chasing .edu or .gov links ignores a lot of other factors. Is suspect the international links are treated much like their .com equivalents. If your site operates in the US and is in English, and you get a .edu.tw (or .com.tw) link from a Taiwanese site written in Mandarin Chinese, that link is going to be low-value in the vast majority of cases.

The best tool.