[RFC] Cloaking in a good and safe manner (Why rel="nofollow" is just a semi-solution).

If you have ever read any SEO blogs or just any other regulary updatable sites about SEO you've probably already seen that many of them are polluted with many various keywords. Here is a good example of keywords pollution (note many gambling keywords all over the page).

According to google's webmaster guidelines I could be treated as a person violated this:
* Don't load pages with irrelevant words.

Did I really violate guidelines?

It depends on the angle of view. In my opinion it is just a missing part in google's code (and in turn guidelines). As always: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", and google is not an exception. To me all keywords I inserted in mentioned page should be there - it is just very natural for a humans to use real examples speaking of any thing. In case of the SEO gambling keywords (and any others, btw) are relevant examples. But I do understand the intentions behind google "irrelevant words" cite. They don't want count such seo's example keywords for their strightforward meaning for an ordinary persons (i.e. as gambling keywords not as seo's keywords examples) and so positioning them for gambling keywords. And I fully appreciate it.

What is a problem? Googlers have already shown that they understood that real live is more sophisticated than their short abstract guidelines. I am speaking about Matt Cutts' interpretation of rel="nofollow" backlink's attribute. I like his short explanation of rel="nofollow" as a way to abstain from editorial vote. Without his explanation it is possible to misunderstood rel="nofollow" concept. For example it would be possible to interpret that google contradicts with another part of it's own guidelines:
* Don't employ cloaking or sneaky redirects.
Because rel="nofollow" does exactly what cloaking means. I.e. delivers different views to a humans (these don't see rel="nofollow") and to search engines (those ones do). But with Matt's explanation it is clear that this is just a hint for a search engine in situation when peoples are not required to have such a hint. Peoples are smart and will understood what is going on anyway - from the surrounding context of backlink E.g. hints like strings:

• comments
• trackbacks
• sponsored links
• this evil person have just spammed my blog
• etc...

are enough for any human.

But rel="nofollow" is just a semi-solution not a full one. The whole internet is just a graph of nodes - pages (mine and others) binded by backlinks. Any of us have been already granted by search engine whether to vote about other nodes or to abstain from a vote (i.e. to put rel="nofollow" attribute or not). Let peoples decide about their own nodes (any part of them) not only about nodes of others...

So what I suggest?

I think that support of e. g.
<div id="myid" rel="not4se">...</div>
syntax will be enough, but I don't care about actual implementation.

Of course all I wrote in this post apply to all search engines (IIRC yahoo and msn have already stated that they support rel="nofollow", not sure about ask...) not only to google. Google and googlers (hello Matt!) is just happen to be most open to a dialog with webmasters currently.

Btw, the whole problem is far wider than just seo keywords - it is all about a hints for a non-humans (i.e. search engines) about any word/phrace/text/content that is used outside of it's strightforward/dictionary connotation.

Any comments are highly appreciated. I know that some of my readers are rather sceptical about me due to my black hat nature (in their eyes). Please forget about black & white while your are reading this post...