<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Link Exchanges &#8211; Run Fast</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fathomdelivers.com/blog/index.php" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fathomdelivers.com/blog/index.php/link-exchanges-run-fast/</link>
	<description>News, trends &#38; analysis from the online marketing experts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:28:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcus Ellington</title>
		<link>http://www.fathomdelivers.com/blog/index.php/link-exchanges-run-fast/#comment-642</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcus Ellington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 15:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fathomseo.com/blog/index.php/2007/12/13/link-exchanges-run-fast/#comment-642</guid>
		<description>Stop spreading misinformation.  Matt Cutts has never stated that reciprocal linking has been diminished.  Stop putting words in his mouth.  Matt has stated very recently: &quot;Trading links is natural and it’s natural to have reciprocal links.&quot;

Google has stated in their guidelines to avoid &quot;excessive reciprocal linking&quot;.  They are obviously referring to full duplex networks that force link exchange without editorial discretion.  Google has never stated &quot;do not link exchange&quot;.  Google obviously realizes websites link with each other when it is relevant.  What is wrong with that?  Nothing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stop spreading misinformation.  Matt Cutts has never stated that reciprocal linking has been diminished.  Stop putting words in his mouth.  Matt has stated very recently: &#8220;Trading links is natural and it’s natural to have reciprocal links.&#8221;</p>
<p>Google has stated in their guidelines to avoid &#8220;excessive reciprocal linking&#8221;.  They are obviously referring to full duplex networks that force link exchange without editorial discretion.  Google has never stated &#8220;do not link exchange&#8221;.  Google obviously realizes websites link with each other when it is relevant.  What is wrong with that?  Nothing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SEO Specialist - Terry Reeves</title>
		<link>http://www.fathomdelivers.com/blog/index.php/link-exchanges-run-fast/#comment-580</link>
		<dc:creator>SEO Specialist - Terry Reeves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 23:10:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fathomseo.com/blog/index.php/2007/12/13/link-exchanges-run-fast/#comment-580</guid>
		<description>Not only that, Matt Cutts stated earlier this year that reciprocal linking has been diminished as a ranking factor for any web site and can harm a web sites rankings if the reciprocal linking is excessive. This hit home real hard in the real estate industry earlier in the year.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only that, Matt Cutts stated earlier this year that reciprocal linking has been diminished as a ranking factor for any web site and can harm a web sites rankings if the reciprocal linking is excessive. This hit home real hard in the real estate industry earlier in the year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

