I saw an article on Forbes.com which mentions Directory Dump heres a snippet Rest of the article here http://www.forbes.com/business/2007/10/02/internet-paid-search-tech-cx_ag_1003google.html
A number of directory owners were contacted by the writer prior to publishing the article. Seemed to me he was looking to put a negative spin on directories.
Yeah, they contacted many directory owners as i heard from friends. Those articles are written by highly qualified and exepert journalists with decades of experience and the articles come in print magazines are read by millions. They won't write any bullshitt stuff.
Aaaaaaaaaaawww ok, But the way the article turned out, doesn't show the slightest negativity towards directories at all.
I didn't suggest that they wrote bullshit - I'm fully aware of the calibre of the publication and the qualifications of the writers
Hello... In the end read the "fine print"... "We know better than to say anything," Gerasoulis says. "The more pressure you put on them, the smarter they become. This war between sites and the search engines has no end." Well ... I never new i was involved in a war.. BUT Whatever google deems appropriate so be it.. We All still continue to work and nothing changes as domains are bought and sold within seconds and sites created within hours and as long as you can play within their guidelines (though these have been personal attacks) then thiers no problems unless created. We will push forward with our technology and try our best for perfection as thats all we can do and no matter what is thrown our way we will become stronger .... thx malcolm
this is all over the net, directories are being branded, rebranded and rerebranded again, my request to others, lets not make this another huge thread,... keep it small and let it die early! that will be in the interest of all!
For the guy that just bad repped me for posting this I never intended for this to be a promotion, just informative. I wanted people in the directories forum to see this, and if it was in the Google forum, you guys wouldn't of saw it.
Adnan no offence but this is information we cant use, Still requesting let this thread die Adnan -> breaking the red annonimity
I disagree, a lot of the language used has negative connotations: "shady practices", "from Google's perspective, scams", "sites, which peddle links by the hundreds or the thousands", "spam sites". Step back from the content of the article, and just focus on the emotive words. Many people who read that article won't be directory builders or even webmasters, and they won't understand all of the issues involved and may well skim over it, coming away with a vague negative impression of all directories as manipulative and useless. The words "online directories filled with nothing but links" could be used to describe Dmoz, Yahoo, and any other major directory, but that doesn't make them useless. ^*#"!!#!@! gutter press, always have to sensationalise everything.
Ok, so should I change the title to something like 'Forbes talks about directories' Would that be better?
would that make it constructive? people reading this will take us (directory owners) as self contained blabberring community! as is this forum as enough bashing! would request you to get in touch with some mod and get this thread closed, M. requesting others lets not discuss this.
Obelia, if your talking about this And if that para refers to the directories mentioned, then the Forbes article is INCORRECT. The editor which wrote that didn't do his research completely and should go ahead and change it. Here is a snippet from Google's Guidelines, which actually encourages siteowners to submit their sites to directories. Full guidelines here http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769 So I still don't see any negativity towards directories in that article.
I have to agree that all this will turn in our favor at the end. Free advertising for those directories, don' you wish to be named on the list? While some might think otherwise, I think those directories named can turn around and become a lot more popular.
The questions posed to me left with with the feeling it would be in my best interest to not respond to them and after reading the article I'm glad I didn't.
All news like to report war, death, destruction and violence....there is no war with google and I think ask.com's statement about giving more weight to relevant incoming links is a step in the right direction and I am sure that is where gooogle is heading. I am a little shocked at the reference to penalties since this has not been proven, definately not proven to be something related to only directories and no one at google has shed any light on these rumors. I guess the old saying that "any publicity is 'good' publicity." is true here. Those words sound like they came out of Rand's mouth
I agree, it's not right: he's painting all of the penalised directories with the same brush, and many of them don't violate Google's webmaster guidelines. (I won't say that none of them do, because I haven't checked out every single one). Then you're not paying enough attention to tone of the article. The way things are said is sometimes more important than what is actually said. And the tone is very negative.