Let me first say that updating a directory submission is sometimes futile, but a webmaster has to try. About a year ago I paid to have a site included in the Skaffe.com directory. Submission cost was cheap b/c it was during a promotion. As luck has it I lost my domain name to my business partner during our breakup. I turn around a started up a new site under a new domain name. I wanted to update my submission to Skaffe so I sent them an email. Let me say that they responded back in less then 24 hours (kudos to them!) I was going to cut and paste the emails, but I felt that it will make the post to long and boring. In a nutshell I was told that I could not change my paid submission’s domain name. They also mention that my new site had too many Google ads. Funny they mention the ads because the old site that was accepted had the same ad and content setup (just a new template). I am not trying to bash Skaffe, I think it is a high quality directory. I just wanted to inform people that if you move your site for whatever reason, you might have to pay for another submission. I really do not believe I over did the ads (check my sig and see for yourself). About 80% of the directories I have submitted (paid and free) to in the past were willing the update the domain name.
Yea, that is strange they wanted you to pay to change your previous submission. And the site in your sig doesn't appear to me to have "too many ads." Looks like a great site. Best of luck! By the way, if you need another directory listing you can submit your site to this category in one of my directories.
If it was just the same site using just a different domain I can't see what the problem is. Is the old domain still active?
dkessaris, yes the domain is still active. My pervious business partner is now managing the old domain name (new site and content). If the submission was paid out of the business pocket, I would not have brother, but I paid for the submission (I still have the receipt). PortProphecy, thanks!!! Sending you a PM about a submission in that directory.
Interesting thought, in regards to updating submissions. In regards to your site contianing too many ads, I would most definately think not. I only counted 3 adsense ads...which is definatley not above the norm. In addition, you make them look clean...so they are not a sore thumb to view the rest of your content.
That's an interesting policy from Skaffe, although it does make some kind of sense. I can imagine that some people might have tried to scam them by bait-and-switching both the domain name and the website's content. If it's on a new domain it definitely merits another review, which is part of what you pay for. On the other hand, rebranding a site is not all that uncommon, and can happen for several reasons. This is definitely one of the things directories should say upfront: whether you can change the domain name on a listing. As well as whether you can change the description, keywords, title, and any other aspect.
hrmmm... too many ads? I wonder if you got some sort of automated response. btw, salsa is the sh*t. i am half bori, so i am biased ;P Rob
Ding! Ding!! Ding!!! winner! A lot of people seem to not understand this concept. Hopefully you have pointed them in the right direction.
Most of us here are IT professionals (and/or geeks) and do understand this, but there are many directories that allow domain name updates if it is valid (see first post). If a directory wants to stick to strick submission rules, that is their choice, but webmasters should at least get the 'heads up' when possible. I for one give referrals and repeat business to companies who bend over backwards when their customers are in need. No wants to hear, "sorry we can't help you b/c of our policy". Just my 2.0 cents... Thanks everyone for the feedback! You guys here at DP are a great resource.
I was personally referring to the comment of justtupeu and I believe an0n was as well (of course he is the one to tell not me). It is just that it is sometimes frustrating that a lot of people don't understand that a web directory isn't just a link farm. I once had a guy insisting that I should accept his computer related site in my environment category simply because it's the category with the highest pr in my directory.
Good point, I could imagine the amount a crap/spam sites directory owners have to review. There are a lot of people out there just looking to make a buck, but the webmasters with the real content sometimes get caught in the cross fire.
We are always willing to update submissions at Skaffe. Unfortunately we are swamped with change my submission requests from persons we do not own the websites. This has caused major problems in the past and we have had to get very strict to protect our submitters. Unless the present domain and the domain to be changed to can be positively researched to belong to the same person at the time of the request or if the old domain is redirected I decline all requests for domain changes. Scams of all kinds have made many things like a simple request to change a submission much more complex. It’s regrettable but unfortunately very necessary.
So will you denied someone who still has the receipt paying for the submission? The payer should have the right to modify the submission (just my 2.0 cents). All your points are very valid, but as you can see my situation is somewhat unique. Also do you think I have too many ads for Skaffe (see sig)??? Might as well ask while you are hear . Thanks for the post!
I don’t normally get into why we decline or accept specific sites on Forums primarily for submitter confidentiality. Your site would have been changed if the replacement met the submission guidelines for advertising. These were updated and are much stricter now then in the past due to the continual and never ending flow of MFA submissions.
What is so unusual about that? [/quote] We do, assuming your domain name say, CHANGED. You stated you started another site. The old site was still active? Still listed? There is clearly a difference and it looks like Skaffe was in the right here. Just an opinion from a directory owner.
That is kewl, it is really not a big deal, you know us IT folks, we always want to know why. Also, so that my propose of this thread does not go in the wrong direction, this post was to inform DPers about my experience with Skaffe. I am not trying to say they was in the wrong/right. Hence the title "learning points".
"too many" is subjective. I looked at your site, and I think it has too many - you have 3 ad blocks on your front page, and at least 2 ad blocks on every other page I visited. Yet one of your responders said he thinks that isn't too much. It is a subjective thing, which means that one editor may not think 3 ad blocks are too many, while another thinks 1 is all that is appropriate. Just guessing - the old site might have been reviewed by a different editor, one who did not have the same opinion about how many ads are "too many". If I had come to your site looking for Salsa dancing in Indy, I would not have looked at the ads. Personally,I never ever click on ads from someone's site. I know the ads are there because you hope to make a few extra bucks. People throw in as much adsense as they think they can get away with, few actually take into consideration the user's experience. Remember you are submitting to "human edited directories" - that means you have to deal with humans and their decisions. Not all of which you'll agree with. Just trying to balance the issue a little.
Correct, ads play two roles, one to make the webmaster a few bucks for providing a free service and two to place the ads tastefully on the site so that the users are not distracted, but given the opportunity to click on them if they find something of interests. In my opinion, I did a good job with my ad placement. I have never received any complaints from my friends who visit my site regularly or anyone from a matter of fact. When an editor reviews a site for submission they should ask themselves this simple question. Are the ads placement on the site done tastefully? Saying that you can only have X number of ads per pages is a poor and lazy way of making such a decision which was the impression that this editor gave me.