Me again.
Here is the email I just received from Linksmanager:
Janet,
Thanks for bringing this forum thread to our attention. We spent some time this afternoon going over the referenced thread and looking at the claims the author stated.
The link checkers are programmed according to a set of rules that we have been tweaking since we launched LinksManager on day one. In the early days of LinksManager, the bots checked far too frequently. Alot of webmasters didn’t like us back then and they sure did let us know about it.
We have analyzed data and determined that most webmasters do not link back in the first few hours after a link swap has been initiated by first webmaster. We have learned over the years that the majority of webmasters who would return a link do not link back until a few days have passed. We also have learned that the majority of link swaps happen in the first 5-14 days and if they don’t happen by then, chances are the other webmaster simple has no interest in linking with the first webmaster.
The link checkers are constantly being improved to check in a way that will not annoy webmasters, but will give our customers the fastest results possible. It’s a tough balance. We want to be accurate as accurate as possible but we don’t want to be bad web neighbors.
By design, the first reciprocation check for a newly submitted link is delayed about a day in order to give the other webmaster necessary time to add your link to his or her website. If the reciprocal link is not found on the first check, a few days will pass before the link is checked again for reciprocation. Each time the link is checked and is not found to be reciprocating, the time between future checks is greater and that is intentional so that we do not annoy our web neighbors. Sites that don’t link by the 4th or 5th check around the 3-4 week mark usually end up never linking back.
In 99% of the cases that we investigate perceived ‘link checker errors’ for our customers via this Helpdesk, the webmaster simply had not posted the link at the exact time that the link was checked by the LinksManager bots.
In summary, if LinksManager spidered more often, the thread you showed us would be folks complaining about how often LinksManager spiders through their sites. It’s a no win situation for us but that does not deter us. We will keep working to improve the software such as improving communications. We did this recently by adding the new WHERES MY LINK variable which displays a URL that hyperlinks to a control page where the receiving webmaster can specify location of YOUR link on THEIR website and vs versa. For more information on that new feature:
http://linksmanager.com/knowledgebase/8.html#6
The forum thread you referenced did make a note of removing links after a reciprocation agreement was made, but thats not really a LinksManager matter, that’s just bad webmastering. Anyone can do that with or without LinksManager.
Feel free to pass along some or any of this information to the folks you know on that forum that you referenced. Thank you again for bringing this forum thread to our attention. Please rest assured the link checkers work quite accurately and if they ever get bogged down, or behind, or we have a technical problem with them (it does happen from time to time), we would be the first to let you know of the matter with a quick update via your LinksManager account control panel entrance page, or a direct mailer.
Please let us know if you have other questions or concerns. Thanks for using LinksManager.com.
Joel – LinksManager.com Helpdesk
http://helpdesk.linksmanager.com
–I can see the dilema they face: A fine balance between not being invasive and the ability to check links accurately.
As with manual links pages, the onus is on us to check our recip. links manually from time to time.