Originally Posted by petercrouch
I am agree with u but Google didn't like Reciprocal Link.
I RARELY do it, but Google does not look badly on reciprocal linking at all, unless the two sites reciprocating are TOTALLY unrelated like a baby toy site and an online casino site. Other than that, there is nothing wrong with reciprocal linking in Google's eyes.
You might want to read what Eric Ward has to say about reciprocal linking
before making statements such as these... And this man knows more about link building than anyone on the planet. They call him "Link Moses" he's so good. When Sports Illustrated, National Geographic and other companies launch web sites, he is frequently the one who gets tapped to come up with a link building campaign for them.
I've also heard Matt Cutts at Pubcon on numerous occasions and others at Google state that Google does NOT frown on reciprocal links as long as they are relevant and not done in excess. It's a natural thing for sites to exchange links. Even if they are not relevant, they are likely just ignored and would never result in a penalty.
Now if you're using some automated link exchange software and reciprocal linking with hundreds of web sites, this is easy for Google to detect. They just had a patent approved in August of this year that was submitted in 2004 that would help them detect such linking schemes. And if they suspect you are using the automated link exchange solely to manipulate their SERPs, it could be considered a violation of their webmaster quality guidelines and could result in penalty.
But simply exchanging links with a dozen or so relevant sites is not going to raise an eyebrow.