Should web directories be sorting their listings according to PR?

Humm... Interesting. I do think that changing things up after they have been set a certain way for such a long time is out of line though. But it's all good on this side.

 

Do you find that using newsfeeds helps get better ranking in your deeper pages? I noticed lots of categories with no links but newsfeeds giving it pr?

 

What about a mod that lists the links in a random "shuffle" order each time the page is opened? This way everyone gets a fair shot at being listed at the top. (under featured listings of course)

 

Random does not mean equal. So, I would be against that, actually.

 

Personally, I do like sorting by date, what would make old submission at the end.

I prefer to sorting by alphabetical.

 

I'm not keen on sorting by PR. It's Google's outdated measure of the links to a site, and in many ways it's close to meaningless. High PR doesn't make a site busier or more interesting.

The more varied the ways we can sort, the better. There are a few directories out there that sort by editorial review, and IMO that's excellent. Otherwise you have the danger of duplicate content, and always seeing the same websites wherever you go.

 

BQTM web directory - sorting by date in descending order.
This gives maximum benefit to the prior submissions than later..

If sorting by PR is allowed, then high PR sites will remain on top and lower PR0/1 are pushed in deep pages.. So new sites will always be at loss.

" First come, First Serve "

 

I believe that every body deserves their turn, and that's why I have a special MOD in dump for this. Two other directories do have it as well, but I won't say which. A fourth will as well, but needs some maturity.
Regardless of where a page lands, the PR does and will pass accordingly(not that PR is the end all be all, but it a major factor when people submit)

I don't believe the news feeds give any PR. I feel it's a combination of promotion and how you pass your PR within your directory from the outside is how it's obtained. PR is a beast, and something I've followed and studied for over a year now. There are way too many factors to even try to explain it. I've been thrown for a loop several times when I think I have a solid foundation, but there are other times where I do things and they work out right(3x now). That of course, is just my own personal opinion and experience with it, and if you asked me if google knew what they were doing with their PR system, I'd answer you with 100% honesty; they don't have a fricken clue.

 

For those who sort by date with the newest first - what incentive do people have to submit to your site when it's new?

Once you've gained a bit of recognition in PR, the SERPs and backlinks; they get demoted to the positions of least value.

I can see where it might help a directory by keeping the content changing on all of the listing pages; but it doesn't offer much to early submittors.

 

That's exactly why I don't like that method.

 

It’s always been my opinion the Page Rank should have nothing to do with the operation of a directory.

 

I give for example; although your initial regular has been sent to the back of the bus, there are now 7 PR4's pointing to its page.

I think it all depends on the directory owner and what they can do to provide incentive.

 

Mike, I could not agree more. IMO, Google does not set the standard for what is and what is not.. Just ask eBay.

There are a culmination of factors that determine a sites value, and PR is only one in a large number of those factors.

Directories IMO, should be sorted first and foremost alphabetically. From there, paid prominence. And in a 'search' of said directory, listings should be by relevance to the keywords chosen, then displayed again, alphabetically and by paid prominence.

YES, PR IS - important. But it is not the only important thing. No one, or site should be giving so much weight to PR. The whole concept of PR has only been around for a short time, and it could disappear or be replaced with something new at any time.

 

anyone considered "sorting" randomly for regular links? this gives exposure for all listings. however all listings should be placed in page1 (more categories )

 

As a part-time directory owner and frequent directory submitter I agree this is the only fair approach.

Directories will be losing submissions if they have too few categories and sort by PR, because there is no incentive to submit to page 4+ of a category, which in most directories will never even be indexed.

Assuming 'joe public' is the theoretical target audience of a directory, rather than 'passing PR', more categories will also help them find what they are looking for better.

And after that, within the more detailed categories, I imagine number of hits on a link would then be the ideal sorting order (and tend to keep earlier submitters at the top of the page).

 

When I started Snoop Directory I was faced with this question... I decided to give top spot to the first submitter. All subsequent submissions go one spot lower. It seems more fair to the submitter that way.

 

how abt a mod for sorting listings by date with the oldest FIRST?? sounds like that wld solve all the problems

i don't agree with sorting by pagerank, as i explained in another thread as it is an inherent biase against high PR sites while the lower ones are always stuck at the bottom or in a separate lower PR page if worse. Why should stronger PR sites be given priority over lower PR sites when it is the lower ones that require help and especially if they both submitted at the same time.

I feel that sorting by date is the way to go with the most loyal (oldest) customers having top listings....

 

I had been watching your Alexa... I went ahead and submitted a few. Best of luck.