No cache still a good link for disavow?

[Shawn124]

Hi Yall,

2 scenarios:

1. I'm on the border line of disavowing some websites that link to me.  If the page is N/A (not available) for the cache, does that mean i should disavow them?

2. What if the particular page was really good content and the webmaster just has the worse seo skills in not interlinking his old blogs, hence why the page that's linking to me is N/A for cache, should i still disavow it?

Thanks

[RyanPurkey]

Sure. Feel free to disavow and block that one. There was a recent well done blog post here on malware / spam referrer sites that could further help you: http://moz.com/ugc/how-to-stop-spam-bots-from-ruining-your-analytics-referral-data. Cheers!

[Shawn124]

Ryan, you are awesome.  I will follow your instructions.  There's just one site crawling website that has MALWARE attached to it.  I would be dumb not to disavow that one right?

[RyanPurkey]

Since those types of links are created automatically and aren't some form of paid linking, I tend to ignore them.  Trying to disavow each and every one would be like whack-a-mole. Hit one, another pops up.

[Shawn124]

Good answer Ryan.  My last question would be about those sites dedicated to crawling your IP, meta titles, competitors, etc.

Like the ones that are from Example  - sitecrawl.com/moz.com (just an example).  It's a follow link but they don't provide any good content and it's a follow link.

[RyanPurkey]

Hi Shawn. Are the sites that you're considering disavowing spammy? It should be fairly clear by looking at their site directly.

Not having a cached page in Google isn't a solid indicator, for example, the Daily Record and Sunday Mail site (http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/) doesn't have their page cached in Google.  You really need to go by the quality of the site sending the link.  Cheers!