Should web directories be sorting their listings according to PR?

My opinion is that bidding web directories are a lot more accurate in determining the value of a web directory than PR. Personally I am getting tired of having web directories sorted by Google pagerank, a number even Google says is for "entertainment purposes only". I find it embarrassing to see a lot of the posts here which show a lot of ignorance regarding what makes a site valuable.
I have a PR 5 directory getting around 30 hits a day total and a PR 2 one getting around 600. I personally am no longer going to bother submitting to web directories where the owner pays too much emphasis on pagerank, especially with so many useless directories coming out on a domain name purchased with pre-existing PR. Do you guys really think you will receive any benefit based on PR long term speaking?



Mike

 

I think detemining the listing should depend on the owner. I have been thinking to list by date of submission --to offer new sites more exposure.

But --if you ignore PR--well I have nothing to say there.

I use this tool http://www.directorydump.com/bls.php --when I check the quality of a site.

My main considerations --

Yahoo backlinks/indeced
Google backlinks/indexed
Domain age
and few more.

Check that --old domains with PR --won't pull these data.

I also visit the site claiming to be PR5/6 and check inner-pages with my toolbar. If the site has PR on inner-pages --then its Legit. Otherwise I just ignore it.

2 days back I was red-repped -because I questioned someone claiming to have 600 uniques per day for his free directory that he claimed PR3 (ofcourse without innerpage PR)
.

So my most important criteria for detemining the quality of a directory is innerpage PRs --. No --innerpage PR --QBC if he/she claims he/she has PR......directory.

But it is completely OK if he/she declares that he/she has installed a directory on an OLD PR domain. I see no problem with that as it suggest the owner is honest.

 

Can't say that I agree with the above statement when it comes to determining the value of a directory. But I do agree that maybe we should not always sort listings in a directory by pr. Last night I changed that in my new directory and chose to go with sorting the listings by the date in which a site was added. Now of course the downside to that is that as new sites are added the old get pushed to the back, but I believe that is why directories have the featured listing option, so if you want to stay at the top you need to purchase a featured listing.

I'd be interested to know what other people think about this as well.

 

okay

Let me tell you one thing

I am just fine tuning my tool (PD) so that it can develop some reliable and accurate data for you to sort out your listings also !

 

Exactly -what I have been thinking. presently my directory is not that crowded -so I can wait. But with time--more-submissions and there must be something for new submitter.

 

At my real estate directory, I am sorting listings alphabetically and so far it is working out very well. I am yet to face the issue but I am sure submitters will try to stuff their titles with numbers (1st, 1, etc.) and letters in order to be on top of the list. That's when strict editorial guidelines will play a huge role.

 

I agree as well, there should be some kind of benifit available for new submitters. My question is should this apply to both free and paid directories or only to one or the other.

 

i sort it with pr, but am thinking about sorting it by hits ...

but hits can be manipulated by users clicking their own sites, and alphabatically is not fair to those owners who have good sites but have to be listed on the bottom ....

 

I order mine by date submitted - oldest first. I think those who submit early when a site has no PR should get the most benefits when the directory becomes older and better valued.

That said, having categories with much more than 5 pages in a single category gives new submittors little incentive to do so and is why I plan on at least trying to keep my categories down to no more than 2 pages before splitting and making new categories/sub-categories.

I think ordering by PR or by bid is essentually the same thing - he who spends the most gets the better placement. Not sure how anyone can say that is an accurate representation of the true value of a site.

 

those who have good sites can buy featured

 

Everybody falls in line when you go to Mcdonalds or Wendy's or even Burger King and it doesnt matter what clothes you wear whether your in shorts, khakis, jeans or tuxedo. FALL IN LINE. If you dont want it, hey thats life, cook your own food at home. Its much CHEAPER.

 

I don't submit to sites that sort by date very much (read very rarely). If it's not a bid directory, I prefer sorting by PR. It's not 100% ideal, but it's the best option available for non-bid sites, in my opinion.

 

Hahaha 10+ popotalk!

Fall in line!

 

Are you saying that if a directory does not sort their listings by pr then the directory provides no value? Where is the value of every directory sorting in this manner? Would'nt that make almost every directory out there the same in terms of listings. For the most part all people would ever see is the same ole listings in each directory and I do not see how that can be attractive to new submitters.

 

I think the order in which sites appear isn't too much of a critical factor, if you really want your site at the top then buy a featured listing or place a big bid.

There are alot more important factors to take into account when judging the quality of a directory. Penalising a directory just because it lists sites by pagerank is not very smart. What other better options are there in terms of ranking listings? Its not that important IMO.

Buy a featured listing guys

Some directories do use more in depth and meaningful methods to rank sites, like this one.

 

Link Book Web Directory default soring option is by date in ascending order. It was a free directory prior to our acquisition, and I didn't think those paying for a review would appreciate being on the last page. This way, paid submissions appear above the exisitng free listings.

I guess if the majority of my sites were high PR I'd also have a preference for sorting by PR.

 

No, I am just saying my personal preference. As for the same listings, I don't think the same people submit to all directories, and more people submit to some directories than others, etc. So, I don't think there's much of an issue there.

 

DirectoryDump Web Directory sorts by a combination of several to ensure that featured listings get their spots on page uno. I also have some counter measures to make certain that PR passes to the alternative deeper pages as well

 

Totally agreed . Tivoli Directory default soring option is by PR in descending order.

 

Fair enough. I only said that because when I look at of the directories out there I normally see the same ole sites at the top, this does not include featured listings because those who paid deserve the right to be at the top. After taking a look at http://www.octopedia.com/ and the way they have things set up I thought it was a good way to go.

To be honest I think this should only apply to free directories, not sure it if would be fair for a paid directory to do so, but at the same time I do think that it is more attractive to a new submitter. As we know most people want to be listed on a page that has good pr and I just have hard time justifying spending x amount of dollars in a paid directory only to be placed at the back of the directory.

Now if the directory has good pr all the way through even page 3 or 4 then I do not see a problem with it. That is just me and the way I chose to go with a free directory.