Now it seems like Google would rather show my unrelated pages instead of the very specific matches that have a decent backlink profile. Whatever - as long as they don’t have to show pages that put effort in to promoting their content!

Alright, that’s my counter-rant. I’m going to go back to staring at numbers until I imagine some patterns.

Unfortunately, they also create fear in innocent webmaster souls all across the planet.

Some call that behavior evil. I’m truly not a Google hater by passion, so I call it plain bullshit.

Listen, as long as I can launch a gazillion of spammy links –that actually help the site I’m spamming for, despite Google’s denials–, a competitor can do that to me, falsely assuming that this alone will tank the link target on Google’s SERPs (in fact I’d say thanks for the promotional efforts).

So what does that mean?

(1) As long as Google for some reason can’t devalue the boost effect of my low-life links in their ranking algos, that’s solely their problem, as long as I don’t own their search engine (what should be the case by now, considering all the free advice I’m providing Google with in my pamphlets … #unfair).

(2) As for the negative SEO purposes, see (1). Of course the methods and procedures of an SEO in this business are more diverse.

That’s the ideal world where artificial links launched by either the site owner or others lack impact. In fact Google has created scattered gray zones where spammy links indeed can harm a site’s rankings, just because they couldn’t resist to implement penalties for non-googley linkage (lazy and un-geeky approach). These parts of their algos are obsolete. Instead they should have invested more time into fine-tuning their link judgement (the geek way to get things done).