We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
2 Clarifed confusing statement
source | link

Do not be afraid.

Google does get new and trending spam terms from obvious abusive usage on sites like you mention. At one point, when new terms were added to the spam list, and assuming with more severe cases of abuse, innocent sites were marked as spam sites just for simple mentions of these new terms. This went on for years while Google tried to tune it's algorithm. Part of the reason why this happened was simply because spam detection is not easy, however, the methods used likely were a bit wrong headed too. It has been a while since the last example I heard of.

I wrote about spam detection in other answers. It is no surprise to anyone that semantic scoring is the primary answer along with associating sites within realms of relationship using a fairly extensive list of indicators. With this assumption, only the spam site should be punished. Google has in the past 6 years has taken a new and aggressive stance against spam and has done a good job. Along the way there were mistakes made of course, however, spam is generally easy to spot when you begin recognizing patterns in the signals. With so many indicators, unless your site fits within the specific patterns of association, your site should not even be a consideration. Assuming you play by the rules, there is no danger, however, Google may look at your site with a skeptics eye for a bit while it figures out if you are a good guy or a bad guy. Not to worry. As long as you do not fit within the spammers realm, all should be fine.

Do not be afraid.

Google does get new and trending spam terms from obvious abusive usage on sites like you mention. At one point, when new terms were added to the spam list, and assuming with more severe cases of abuse, innocent sites were marked as spam sites just for simple mentions of these new terms. This went on for years while Google tried to tune it's algorithm. Part of the reason why this happened was simply because spam detection is not easy, however, the methods used likely were a bit wrong headed too. It has been a while since the last example I heard of.

I wrote about spam detection in other answers. It is no surprise to anyone that semantic scoring is the primary answer along with associating sites within realms of relationship using a fairly extensive list of indicators. With this assumption, only the spam site should be punished. Google has in the past 6 years has taken a new and aggressive stance against spam and has done a good job. Along the way there were mistakes made of course, however, spam is generally easy to spot. With so many indicators, unless your site fits within the specific patterns of association, your site should not even be a consideration. Assuming you play by the rules, there is no danger, however, Google may look at your site with a skeptics eye for a bit while it figures out if you are a good guy or a bad guy. Not to worry. As long as you do not fit within the spammers realm, all should be fine.

Do not be afraid.

Google does get new and trending spam terms from obvious abusive usage on sites like you mention. At one point, when new terms were added to the spam list, and assuming with more severe cases of abuse, innocent sites were marked as spam sites just for simple mentions of these new terms. This went on for years while Google tried to tune it's algorithm. Part of the reason why this happened was simply because spam detection is not easy, however, the methods used likely were a bit wrong headed too. It has been a while since the last example I heard of.

I wrote about spam detection in other answers. It is no surprise to anyone that semantic scoring is the primary answer along with associating sites within realms of relationship using a fairly extensive list of indicators. With this assumption, only the spam site should be punished. Google has in the past 6 years has taken a new and aggressive stance against spam and has done a good job. Along the way there were mistakes made of course, however, spam is generally easy to spot when you begin recognizing patterns in the signals. With so many indicators, unless your site fits within the specific patterns of association, your site should not even be a consideration. Assuming you play by the rules, there is no danger, however, Google may look at your site with a skeptics eye for a bit while it figures out if you are a good guy or a bad guy. Not to worry. As long as you do not fit within the spammers realm, all should be fine.

1
source | link

Do not be afraid.

Google does get new and trending spam terms from obvious abusive usage on sites like you mention. At one point, when new terms were added to the spam list, and assuming with more severe cases of abuse, innocent sites were marked as spam sites just for simple mentions of these new terms. This went on for years while Google tried to tune it's algorithm. Part of the reason why this happened was simply because spam detection is not easy, however, the methods used likely were a bit wrong headed too. It has been a while since the last example I heard of.

I wrote about spam detection in other answers. It is no surprise to anyone that semantic scoring is the primary answer along with associating sites within realms of relationship using a fairly extensive list of indicators. With this assumption, only the spam site should be punished. Google has in the past 6 years has taken a new and aggressive stance against spam and has done a good job. Along the way there were mistakes made of course, however, spam is generally easy to spot. With so many indicators, unless your site fits within the specific patterns of association, your site should not even be a consideration. Assuming you play by the rules, there is no danger, however, Google may look at your site with a skeptics eye for a bit while it figures out if you are a good guy or a bad guy. Not to worry. As long as you do not fit within the spammers realm, all should be fine.