tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6458461702526183997.post4066214170767809659..comments2009-10-04T22:59:12.629+05:30DesiHotMasalanoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6458461702526183997.post-35812575871424852192009-10-04T22:59:12.629+05:302009-10-04T22:59:12.629+05:30I agree but then what good do these links of digg, twitter and stumbleupon do ?<br /><br />So I prefer doing a nofollow to these.<br /><br />Moreover I researched and found that bigger blogs also do the same ... err... example Mashable !<br /><br />Regards<br />PushpinderPushpinder Singh Baggahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09618485077900761614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6458461702526183997.post-74844741315920209872009-10-04T22:52:05.858+05:302009-10-04T22:52:05.858+05:30Matt Cutts made a statement a year or so ago about the effects of &quot;nofollow&quot; and how Google had made changes to the way the spiders handled it...<br /><br />Basically, a long story short is:<br /><br />nofollow should mainly be used now in association with in-site links (faq,about,etc...) to prevent the spiders from indexing links that lead to useless information on YOUR domain.<br /><br />However, they&#39;re &quot;following&quot; all external links now in an attempt to help reduce spammy link farms and so forth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com