This is not a compliance checkbox to increase our E-E-A-T — though it’s great that it does, because some of you will actually read it. We’re an SEO firm. We know what these pages signal. But that’s not why this page exists.

This is a statement about how this firm operates — what we commit to, what we don’t do, and what we expect from ourselves. We publish it because we believe that an organization willing to state its standards publicly is one worth working with.

1. Client First

Every recommendation we make is grounded in data and in the client’s interest. We will never recommend a strategy we wouldn’t apply to our own properties. We will never upsell a service a client doesn’t need. We will never withhold information that would help a client make a better decision — even if that decision means they need less of us.

If the data says you don’t need more links, we’ll tell you. If your site has technical problems that links won’t fix, we’ll tell you that too. Selling work a client doesn’t need is not a revenue strategy — it’s a trust debt that compounds.

2. The Reality of SEO Risk

This is the section most agencies would rather not write. We write it because our clients deserve to understand the field they’re operating in.

No SEO exists without risk. Zero guarantees of outcomes exist — from any practitioner, anywhere, ever.

Here is what that means in practice:

• Algorithm updates can redistribute rankings across an entire vertical overnight. Google ships multiple core updates per year, and their effects are neither predictable nor reversible
• A seemingly innocent change to your own website — a heading rewrite, a URL restructure, a template migration — can trigger an algorithmic re-evaluation that affects traffic in ways no one anticipated
• Competitor actions shift the landscape without warning. A new entrant, a link acquisition campaign from a competitor, or a change in user behavior can erode positions regardless of what you’ve done
• Off-page SEO specifically operates in the space between Google’s stated guidelines and their actual ranking behavior. That space has existed since PageRank was invented. It requires judgment, experience, and an honest assessment of risk

Our commitment: We minimize risk and maximize probability through intelligence-led methodology. We study how Google’s ranking systems actually work — the patents, the documented signals, the leak data, the patterns that a decade of practice reveals. We design campaigns based on that intelligence. But we are always honest about the boundary between what we influence and what we don’t.

If someone tells you they can guarantee SEO results, they are either misinformed or misleading you. We are neither.

3. What Google Says About Backlinks — and What the Data Shows

You should know this: Google’s official documentation classifies link building for ranking purposes as “link spam.” Their Spam Policies for Google Web Search state it plainly:

“Link spam is the practice of creating links to or from a site primarily for the purpose of manipulating search rankings.”

Examples include: “Buying or selling links for ranking purposes,” “Excessive link exchanges,” and “Advertorials or native advertising where payment is received for articles that include links that pass ranking credit.”

— Google Search Central: Spam Policies — Link Spam

You should also know this: In no competitive industry can you rank without building your off-page link and brand graph. The data is unambiguous. Sites that appear in positions 1–3 for high-value commercial queries have substantially larger, more authoritative, and more topically relevant link profiles than the sites below them. This is true across every vertical we’ve studied, in every market, without exception.

How do you build that link profile ethically, safely, and effectively? That’s the question we’ve spent a decade answering. Our methodology is built on the principles described in Sections 4 and 6 of this page — real publishers, editorial integrity, long-term safety, and quality standards that don’t bend.

4. Link Building Ethics

Google’s Webmaster Guidelines exist. We’ve read them. Every practitioner in this industry should. Here’s our position:

Google’s guidelines are a risk assessment framework — not a moral compass. The distinction matters. Every link that exists on the web was either placed organically or through some form of outreach, relationship, or effort. The question is not whether a link was “natural” — it’s whether the link provides genuine value to the reader, comes from a trustworthy source, and reflects real editorial judgment.

What we do:

• Place links on real publications with real traffic, real editorial standards, and real audiences
• Vet every publisher against our quality vetting standard that monitors traffic, content quality, editorial integrity, and indexation health
• Prioritize long-term client safety over short-term metric gains
• Replace any placement where the publisher’s quality deteriorates

What we don’t do:

• Private Blog Networks (PBNs) or link farms
• Spam, comment links, or automated link schemes
• Manipulating metrics to misrepresent quality
• Any tactic that puts a client’s business at risk for a marginal short-term gain

If a method isn’t something we’d use on our own properties, we don’t offer it to clients.

5. Transparency on Methodology

We show the working. When we recommend a strategy, we explain why — what the data reveals, what the competitive landscape looks like, what the risks and trade-offs are. The client reviews the evidence and makes the informed choice.

We present probabilities, not certainties. We present data, not promises.

The frameworks that underpin our approach — TISEL and TCLUB — were developed by our CEO, Alejandro Meyerhans, and are published openly on his research site. They are attributed to his work, not claimed as corporate trade secrets. When we reference external research, we cite it. When we don’t know something, we say so.

6. AI Usage

We use AI extensively. Content drafting, competitive analysis, data processing, report generation, and internal operations all benefit from AI tools. We are building systems — not hiding from the tools that make them better.

What remains human: Strategy. Methodology. Editorial judgment. Quality evaluation. Client conversations. Every recommendation a client receives has been reviewed, validated, and signed off by a human with the experience to know if it’s right.

We disclose this openly because we believe the output quality matters more than the tools used to produce it — and because pretending otherwise would violate the standard of transparency we hold ourselves to.

7. Publisher Standards

Every publisher in our network is vetted before we place a single link. Our evaluation covers:

• Real traffic — verified through multiple data sources, not self-reported
• Real content — editorial standards, content quality, publishing cadence
• Editorial integrity — we work with publishers who maintain genuine editorial policies, not content mills that accept anything for a fee
• Ongoing monitoring — publishers are re-evaluated periodically. If quality drops, placements are removed or replaced

We maintain this standard because the quality of the sites that link to our clients is a direct signal to search engines. Placing a link on a low-quality site isn’t just ineffective — it’s a risk we refuse to introduce.

8. Disclosures

If Get Me Links has an affiliate relationship, partnership, or financial arrangement that could influence a recommendation, we disclose it. If we recommend a tool, a platform, or a partner where we receive compensation, that relationship is stated.

We don’t hide commercial relationships behind editorial language.

9. Accountability

These are not aspirations. They are standards. If we fall short of anything on this page — in the work we deliver, in how we communicate, or in how we operate — we want to hear about it.

Email: [email protected] with the subject line “Ethics Concern.”

We take every report seriously. We investigate. We respond.

---

See also: Disclaimer · Service Standards · Terms of Service