Welcome to the Q&A Forum

You can get a quick list of (currently 917) domains in the globe network at the url below which I found by googling the following:

inurl:the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages

http://www.theglobe.bet/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages-txt.txt

Hi Carson,

Thanks for your considered reply.

I was very interested to hear your opinion about unnatural links warnings via GWT and whether they can be necessarily interpreted as manual penalties.

As usual there are conflicting opinions and the particular wording in the warning I saw is different from the wording I have seen quoted in other examples on the web. It has a feel of being slightly more tailored ... although algorithms can do tailoring!

It seems logical that Google would use an algorithmic approach wherever possible in the interests of economy and consistency but there have to be sanity checks by real people so maybe GWT emails can be triggered by algorithm or human override.

The first sentence in both your "manual penalties" and also your "refreshing adjustments" suggest to me that it might not be possible to outmanoeuvre penalties by side-stepping (domain switching).

Maybe there's also an argument here that what's best for the user should be what's best for SEO?

What's best for the user must surely be not to confuse them or change domains so maybe that's the best approach also from an SEO POV.

Oh boy. I love SEO but I think I'll do some gardening tomorrow.

I believe the answer to almost every question about SEO should begin with "it depends" and therefore I think neither of the two views you have quoted can be right in all circumstances.

The best solution for a particular case might depend on the structure of the page and that should be driven first and foremost by providing the best solution for visitors which may not be the same as prescribed by an SEO rule book.

Re. bonus question:

My home page (www.adjuice.co.uk) has its logo as its H1 so is an example of what you describe in your bonus question. The home page currently ('touch wood') ranks very well for lots of competitive terms so I find it difficult to imagine that this arrangement could be disadvantageous in any way.

A business traded on a domain let's say example.COM which was heavily penalised due to non-removable spammy back links. Their previous SEO advised them to set up on example.CO.UK but redirected example.COM to example.CO.UK.

Example.CO.UK ranks very poorly, presumably due to being 'tarred with the same brush' i.e. attributed with the ills of example.COM.

Will it do any good to remove the redirect or is example.CO.UK now doomed as well?