I read two blog posts this week that touch on a fascinating subject, and both are worthy of perusal:

1. How Google Profiles SEOs from Wolf Howl
2. Google Openly Profiles SEOs as Criminals from Outspoken Media

The basic premise is that Google's web spam team, a division of their search quality unit, is especially aggressive about researching the backgrounds & projects of individuals in the SEO and webmaster space. These "operators of interest" have their activities monitored with greater scrutiny than the web community as a whole, and find that the rules/standards may be applied quite differently to their websites and web marketing efforts than those of their less "on the SEO radar" peers.

As it turns out, the subject of these particular anecdotes, Michael Gray's Viral Conversations and Rae Hoffman's BBGeeks.com, are not alone. SEOmoz itself has, several times, come under similar scrutiny and requests. Several years ago, for example, we were warned by a representative from one of the major engines that maintaining live links on our user profile pages  would cause potential problems. To compensate for this, we shifted policy so that only after earning 100 mozpoints (garnered through commenting, thumbs and submission of YOUmoz posts) would we remove the nofollow from the external profile link (see, for example, Rishi Lakhani, whose earned a live link through his terrific participation).

We were recently also asked to remove Google's PageRank score from our SEOmoz toolbar. We have an update coming in early August that will take that functionality out of our mozBar, but add some other cool features to make up for the loss. Obviously, many thousands of companies and organizations employ PageRank in their toolbar and applications, but because SEOmoz falls under an "operators of interest" designation, we're likely to continue to receive scrutiny of this kind.

I strongly suspect that Google gets a lot of perceived value from this endeavor in at least one of two ways (and possibly both):

1. The 80/20 Rule of Spam: 80% of the manipulation that hurts Google's results is caused by 20% of the manipulative SEOs. This 20% likely has some correlation with the "operators of interest." By keeping tabs on some meaningful chunk of the manipulators, Google can prevent a portion from affecting their results.
2. Public Relations: I'd venture a guess that 50% of active SEOs keep abreast of where, when and how Google takes action against their peers and the messaging they send out. Much of the other 50% hears the most important of these "through the grapevine." When big targets are taken down or warned, it filters out into the broader sphere of search marketing. The recent flap on PageRank Sculpting is an excellent example - a single interview answer during an event led to companies considering changing their entire implementation of a long-held best practice.

Personally, I think that while it's valid to register dissatisfaction with the inequity of how the rules are applied, these complaints are unlikely to have a meaningful impact on the way Google does business. Instead, I think that this topic presents a number of takeaways for business owners and SEO operators:

• Decide Whether it Pays to Become a "Well-Known" SEO
  Reputation in the search marketing field is excellent for growing your potential client base, getting more and better job opportunities, increasing your networking potential and, of course, boosting external social validation (the pinnacle of Maslow's Hierarchy and an udeniable human quality). However, it can hurt how Google perceives the "intent" of your marketing activities. Link building practices that could pass for "buzz building" might be considered manipulative and straying into gray/black hat territory is likely to be considered "purposeful" and thus subject to longer, harsher penalization (since Google presumes you "know what you're doing").
• If Your Company Engages an SEO, Make a Smart Disclosure Decision
  At SEOmoz, we request that our clients provide references and public testimonials (and permit us to use them in case studies). As a result, we have to be exceptionally careful about all the SEO initiatives that we recommend. CSS badges with "almost" matching anchor text isn't good enough. Footer links with optimized anchors are a danger zone. Rewarding user-generated content with links in a blatantly/manipulatively messaged fashion is off the table. Link buying? Forget about it. Many other tactics fall into this arena. We, along with many well-known, transparent SEO companies have to abide by a stricter set of rules than those who operate behind the veil of non-disclosure.
• If You're "On the Radar," Carefully Consider Your Projects
  Many of the most well-known gray/black hat SEO operators choose very competitive niches that are high risk and high reward. These folks regularly complain that they receive undue scrutiny compared to others in the same field. And while, yes, it's unfair that Google penalized your site and links and left your equally spammy competitor unscathed, it's also to be expected. Operators of Interest are like the daughter that's always getting into trouble. Sure, her sister might have been equally late after curfew on Saturday night, but she doesn't have a history of mischief.
• Think About Intent Wherever You Practice SEO
  Google's Terms of Service and public messages are merely the beginning of the "rules to play by." It may be frustrating to imagine a massive, unspoken set of guidelines by which you must abide in the SEO field, but if you can justify your moves with the mantra "I'm doing this for engines, not users" and the caveat "I'd happily show this process to someone on Google's web spam team," you'll be much safer in the long run.
• Prepare for Greater Scrutiny in Competitive Arenas
  Operating in the PPC world (Porn, Pills and Casinos)? Or even the high-value, high visibility verticals one echelon below these (travel, finance, online education, web hosting, etc.)? Prepare to have both greater competition and a greater incentive to spam (because many others are engaging in it). Unfortuately, if you're an "Operator of Interest," these fields are even more challenging because you need to maintain anonymity or stick closer to the guidelines than your lesser-known peers.
• Plan to Be "Reported" for any Gray/Black Hat Activity
  Google receives many, many thousands of spam reports, both through webmaster tools and their public spam report form every month (maybe every week at this point). While the SEO world complains bitterly about those who talk about manipulative practices on their blogs, the vast majority of all spam reports are known only to Google (and are certainly far more damaging, more specific and more useful) than what happens in the public blogosphere. It's in the interests of your competitors to spam report you - and the more visible you are, the greater the chances you'll be reported. At every conference I've ever been to, representatives from Google receive in-person spam reports from SEOs - this is not a unique practice and those who would engage in anything that crosses the line should expect to get reported.

Hopefully, this information/advice will help make you better at understanding the risks and benefits of publicity and of Google's operations in the realm of web spam. I'll make a rare theologic reference:

Grant to us the serenity of mind to accept that which cannot be changed; courage to change that which can be changed, and wisdom to know the one from the other.

I don't think we (the SEO community) can change Google's approach to web spam or the ways in which they apply standards differently to different parties, but I do think we can accept it as the way things are and use that knowledge to make better decisions about how we do our jobs.

BTW - I don't want to suggest that I or SEOmoz is upset about being on an "operators of interest" list. Many great privileges accompany the increased scrutiny and we're both grateful and humbled by the opportunities and kindnesses shown to us across the search community.