Is paper.li a Penguin no-no?

[RScime25]

One of our blog posts was just linked to from a paper.li site; the post on the site was then tweeted by the site's owner.

From what I was able to determine, paper.li is little more than an aggregator, and the tweet was most likely automated.

So, this is my two-part question: 1) Is the paper.li platform one that Penguin disapproves of, and 2) if so, should I prepare to disavow?

[gazzerman1]

I am but there are issues, WMT has some serious issues few people know about.

When you download your latest links and compare it with the previous one (lets say two weeks apart), now check the same date for example 1st June. The links will be different! For some reason a vast majority of dates will have different links. So if your file is like mine and has 16,000+ links, going through them and working out dofollw/nofollow/notfound is hell on earth to do even once a month.

Google does not want you to recover. If they did they would give you some assistance in this matter, instead they direct you to ahrefs and majestic etc.. That do not have as all the links either and leave room for mistakes. If they wanted you to clean up the mess you or seo agencies made then why not give us the tools to do so and we would all get a good job done.

Anyway I don't want to hijack your question with my rant LOL

[RScime25]

I think your suggestion in the last paragraph is an excellent one.

I'm currently in the process of putting together a "War Room" of sorts to immediately respond to negative ORM issues (think Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign,) and preparing disavows in advance might have a place in that.

[AdamWormann]

Wow Gary.  That sucks and I'm so sorry that happened.  What are you doing now?  Are you watching new links like a hawk?

[gazzerman1]

I had a frustrating chat a little while ago with a Google Employee regarding a site of mine that was in a manual penalty.

I was forced to look at every link coming to my site and determine what was natural and what was unnatural in the eyes of a Google Web Spam team Reviewer.

Links that were simply low quality and clear as the day is long that someone else had created much like the links you are talking about were deemed my problem and for me to remove. There were people linking to my site in forums that clearly had hundreds if not thousands of posts some not saying positive things about my company (very very rare but there is always one.) and I was forced to include those in the disavow file or have them removed. Madness

The level to which you need to keep an eye on your links right now is totally out of control and all though the links you speak of are not a problem now, the way Google is going they will be in the future when they find something else they don't like about you.

Question is how much time do you have on your hands to monitor this kind of stuff all the time.

If you want some middle ground, prepare a disavow file with links you are worried about that way you can submit them it at a moments notice.

[RScime25]

Thank you. Anybody else have a comment?

[AdamWormann]

I wouldn't worry about it at all.  First, if there's just a couple of links like that which Google doesn't like, Google's not going to care because it's such a low percentage of your profile.

Second, Google knows it's an aggregator site and probably just devalues it if it doesn't like the content.

If it was me, I honestly wouldn't give it a second thought and would just ignore it.