The only reason to use a fragment (the hashtag part of a URL is called a fragment) as your anchor, is that you're adding that link solely for the purpose of tying it to a DOM event (like an onclick event). There's better ways to do this in modern web programming, but it's still possible to see some old school sites doing

link

By definition, fragments exist solely for the client. Your web server will not log them. Google Analytics does not natively track them. So clicking on an empty fragment like that will just take you back to the top of your page (provided the JS doesn't stop the event). There's nothing to track. But there's something interesting to note here

link

Google can actually do some basic JS and it will recognize this bad attempt at link obfuscation as an actual link. So if you have links similar to this (which is not recommended) then those links will be counted as links. Be aware of this if you're worried about backlinks.

Give the SSL Labs tool a try. If you have a misconfiguration it should help you identify it

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/

Have you journeyed to Seattle and tried meditating in the Moz break room while holding a Roger plushie until security escorts you out? (sorry, I couldn't resist)

First off, you need to better organize your site. It's not horrible, but the URLs are all over the place. Blogs are smashed together onto single pages. Content is disjointed.

Second... pervy quest? What? You need people to take your site seriously and dangling the prospect of NSFW imagery isn't going to help that (and might get you added to some domain filter lists). Don't play up the "naked" part. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to use that word.

Third... what is the site about? It's not obvious from a quick glance at the front page. Theory of Everything? That's cool but... what was I doing here again? You need a better design (too many stock images and cut out the rotating images as it distracts from the page) and you need some focus. All the content needs to pull in the same direction. What is it they want visitors to leave with? (besides a crystal bauble)

I don't know that it much matters. The localization signal from just the ccTLD is not terribly strong but it should be the same for both the older .com.xx as well as the newer .xx

For purely aesthetic reasons I would choose .xx

Wayfair is a similar comparison. Wayfair represents a single consolidated site compared to their 200+ domains previously (under the CSN brand). I'm familiar with them since we did similar things back in the day. I'm not sure how applicable it is because we used to do the same mega-spam footers they did. The bulk of their problem (long before Penguin) was that they were what is best termed as incestuous linking schemes. What crib bedding has to do with pool covers is anybody's guess. What likely tripped them up was, back in the day, we all linked keyword rich links to the sites without any regard to relevance. Once Google catches that you have to get rid of it. A single domain is far easier to SEO for, but they probably ultimately consolidated for the sake of advertising (their ads are everywhere). But (on point with the OP) Hayneedle did 301 their old domains to their new consolidated domain, and obviously for SEO benefit. Example

I don't think it's as big a deal now because link wheels like that are long gone. I have also seen other smaller networks arise (i.e. Soap) that link between properties (in the header no less) and do not nofollow anything. It's worth noting that these networks are poorly related (camping vs diapers vs clothing) so I don't think there's any real focus on SEO there (or they just don't care). At best these links carry some minor boost but at worst they carry no weight at all. Either way, if there was a penalty it doesn't show up.

Not really. Google is looking for unnatural links and patterns. A single sitewide footer link isn't going to impact SEO that much. If the sites all share the same server/IP Google will likely just devalue them (not penalize) and move on. If you're still uncertain you can always nofollow them.

The only exception would be if you're trying to link targeted words in the anchor (which does look spammy). Just link the site names.

Why do you NEED a blog? More importantly, why do you need a blog for what is a highly technical (and probably arcane) topic?

Blogging is not for everyone and everything. Blogging is for where there is some form of dialog or constant change where you can generate fresh content people want to read on a regular basis. I have one website where a blog makes a lot of sense. It lends itself to lots of artsy-deco blogs and we have some talented young ladies who have found a niche in writing that. Their readership isn't stellar, but combined with social media efforts it works decently well. I have many other websites where we have no blog and never will, because attempting to blog about those topics would be pointless because nobody would ever read them. Instead, we put the information out and then market the sites as best as we can.

It sounds like you're a bit too niche here. If all you do is SEO, and don't offer, say, online marketing, you're really missing out because SEO as a job by itself is really hard to sustain. Offer to set up an Adwords campaign or offer to do some work on their social media. Maybe they need more local efforts. Do they show up on your phone if you search for what it is that they do? I find myself using Google Now a TON for local because Google makes it stupid easy to find. Websites, maps and phones numbers (with one click to open up my dialer and call).

Offering more services should help keep your clients happy. Especially if they don't have the time (or drive) to work with you on SEO.

Your misspelled domains should 301 to the correct domain. You can make any subdomains redirect to the proper TLD as well.