[Feature Request] Improved Link Filtering System for SEO Optimization Adding Temp Backlinks-Dofollow

[403 - Forbiddeen]

 

The link filtering system is impressive, but it has some flaws that I believe can negatively impact SEO.

When adding a link to a website, the entire site allows that link to be followed by search engine systems. Someone with some knowledge of IPS (now IC) can exploit this and, even subtly, create harmful backlinks for specific sites (e.g., Site X or Y). This approach can lead to negative consequences.

My suggestion is to implement a system similar to WordPress, where I can decide which links should be followed. For example, I could allow follow links in specific content, such as articles in Pages, Blogs, or specific forums.

Additionally, it would be valuable to introduce a way to create temporary backlinks that apply only to a single post or thread, without impacting the rest of the site. The current system, which allows site-wide backlinks, should remain for other purposes, but for single-use cases, there could be a separate system—or a complementary feature—dedicated to managing one-off backlinks within specific posts.

While the current system is useful for certain purposes, I believe websites that sell sponsored posts or articles, for instance, should have greater control over this.

It would also be helpful to restrict backlinks to a specific link, ensuring that it can only appear once in a single article, post, thread, etc. This would prevent abuse and maintain a cleaner, more effective SEO strategy.

And how to do this? Very simple, when creating a topic/article/page/blog, etc., in the creation form, users who have permission can add backlinks for dofollow links in an extra field, so only that message or post will have the desired backlink.

 

[Matt]

This will be helpful for about 0.07% of our customer base from enterprise down to the smallest of communities and likely improve your SEO by roughly the same percentage.

While I don't disagree in principle, Google only takes these things as hints, not cast-iron directives. Also, most members when creating content won't complete a list of allowed domains that can backlink. They'll just use default or leave them empty.

We do of course use rel="nofollow" on most things outside of content and profiles.

[403 - Forbiddeen]

8 minutes ago, Matt said:

This will be helpful for about 0.07% of our customer base from enterprise down to the smallest of communities and likely improve your SEO by roughly the same percentage.

While I don't disagree in principle, Google only takes these things as hints, not cast-iron directives. Also, most members when creating content won't complete a list of allowed domains that can backlink. They'll just use default or leave them empty.

We do of course use rel="nofollow" on most things outside of content and profiles.

In this case, I believe that this is a very easy addition to do, basically just adding a system where I can add multiple links, I understand that the customer base that can use this is small, but it is something that I see as being interesting to have in the long term.

[Jim M]

8 minutes ago, 403 - Forbiddeen said:

In this case, I believe that this is a very easy addition to do, basically just adding a system where I can add multiple links, I understand that the customer base that can use this is small, but it is something that I see as being interesting to have in the long term.

It may be better suited for you to commission a third party developer to develop this for you then. We, unfortunately, have limited resources and time so try to focus our efforts where they can do our clients the most good.

[403 - Forbiddeen]

12 minutes ago, Jim M said:

It may be better suited for you to commission a third party developer to develop this for you then. We, unfortunately, have limited resources and time so try to focus our efforts where they can do our clients the most good.

Although I don't understand much about the IPS programming part, I believe that this wouldn't be something very difficult to add, because you already have the system, it would literally just be a matter of improving it, but I understand what you mean.

Edited December 12 by 403 - Forbiddeen

[Jim M]

3 minutes ago, 403 - Forbiddeen said:

Although it doesn't affect the IPS programming part, I believe that this wouldn't be something very difficult to add, because you already have the system, it would literally just be a matter of improving that, but I understand what you mean.

I am not estimating this task but as a project manager in another life, I used to tell my people when they say something was "not very difficult to add": "6 ten minute tasks keeps you an hour away from something meaningful. Time adds up." 🙂 Also, have to keep in mind it is not just the initial development, testing, and releasing but the after support as well.