When it comes to submissions that have Adsense or other advertising on them, where do you draw the line between a site simply being well monetized or straying into MFA? Does it matter to you if the site has quality content, even if it is a bit hard to spot? Or if the first thing you see are ads - it's not going to be accepted into your directory? I remember sometime back several directory owners used the number of ads as a guideline. I don't totally agree with that assessment because a site that uses only 1 ad could still be a total waste of time. Whereas, a site with the maximum number of ads could indeed be outstanding. I suspect the majority of the sites nowadays have some sort of monetization going on, but when in your opinion does it cross the line? As a directory owner do you even care if a submitted site does cross that line?
All responsible Directory Owners care about their Directories and the service and features that they provide for all their clients, both new & old The MFA is a complex issue and needs to be assessed on a site by site basis (imho)
Hello... Well MOST legitimate businesses online don't have adsence on their sites nor do they advertise someone elses product but their own. Webmasters are the reason for adsence on the website to monitize thier site in anyway they can which 90% after the domain expires so does the site as they see it didn't perform to their expectations. We can tolerate 1 MAX adsence on a site providing they are discreetly tucked away and not in plain view that obstructs from the main sites theme. (No don't trick them into clicking it either by placing in navigation) NOTE: Editors also need to go past the home page and actually review all sites as webmasters are becoming more intelligent in that they have a great cover then you click a link and its infested with ads and banners. (Directory owners and editors beware as its happening more and more) MFA: depending on the site as some affiliates now do just offer the affiliate template with the option to write your own content which must be made on a case by case review. thx malcolm
not every site having adsense are MFA sites.. MFA sites clearly stands out.. few lines of description on so called high paying keywords.. and adsense all around them.
With both of my directory niches, I have a fair split between those selling their own products or services and those that have sites that share information. Some of the sellers don't have ads, some do. (Never understood why someone would put ads on a sales site, but to each his own I suppose.) Crafters as a whole are more about sharing information and the joy of craft then they are about creating MFA sites - or they just hide it better. Most of the MFA sites in this niche simply use PLR articles and have little or no pictures on the site which makes it very easy to spot them. With the pet sites, it is much harder to evaluate the good from the sleazy. I have a pair of sites in my queue right now from the same person. Both appear to have quality content, but it is very obvious from visiting the site that they really would prefer you click on an ad then read their words. The content is better than most of the poorly written PLR crap and it does appear to be not used on 500 other sites. If this were the only issue, I would accept the site based on the quality of the content. However, the site has tons of links on the bottom of each page to the articles on the site, but also tons of directories and other sites are listed. There would be no reason for the site to naturally link to these directories as they are general directories and not pet-related, they're not even linking to pet-related categories. I guess as I'm writing this I am indeed answering my own question, but I was just wondering if anyone else would share some of the criteria they use when evaluating if a site is simply being monetized, after all I don't think there are many here that are running their sites for any other reason then to make money; or if a site is all about the money and does not offer anything to visitors.
Interesting.... I decided to click the banner ad above that leads you to this.. backlinksolutions.net/ Would you accept this site into one off your directories? let me answer... Hell NO So why would big "G" ever allow something like this to be acceptable in their adsence? Does it contain quality origanal content? ummmm i dont think so... I suppose in the end its really your call and how you decide to monetize your directory or site and what you will and wont accept. thx malcolm
This isn't necessarily true. It really depends on the type of site. Some sites are selling products and others are providing information. Most legitimate product sales sites don't have a lot of adsense or other advertising. Most information sites are filled with advertisements and advertisers in prominent positions on the page. Here are a few examples that have a lot of advertising...and I could go on all day. www.nytimes.com www.cnn.com www.yahoo.com www.google.com Bottom line you have to judge a site by it's content and where it links to. Good sites will have useful content and useful outbound links. MFA sites are easy to spot. If the only place you can click to get off the page is an advertisement you've got a MFA.
MOST is the key word... Ive noticed that when a free directory is offering submissions its a "freeforall" off webmaster sites and a few good sites where as and a paid directory gets more legit sites submitted that manage to stay online much longer then 1 year and are professionals in what they do....EX doctors, attorney's, ect ect which none have adsence or such type ads on thier sites as they are trying to keep you there (at their site) to buy or sell services where as the webmaster is about monetizing ... I agree each site must be reviewed by one on one bases... thx malcolm
I dont judge by the amount of adsense or similar in place, if i visit the site and im faced with a big block of adsense before the content and the text content is smaller than the adsense ad then thats too much. If the page is lacking and i can visit all the pages in 2mins and theres lots of ads in place then im put off. Sometimes it can be done in a tasteful way, there may be quite a few ads but the site is so good quality, the ads have been blended, but not in a tricky way (like where they know you will accidentally click) and the site may be well established that the content far out weighs the advertisements even though there a fair amount of them. The choice of ads too is important, if they have very relevant ads then of course its much better than something completely random. Too many flashing, dancing, in your face banner ads could influence my decision.
Interesting, it would seem the prevailing opinion is a definite - it depends. For me there are those sites where it is almost a pleasure to hit the delete button - their submission defies my TOS, the site has scraped or unmodified PLR-type content, the site has no content or a host of the obvious things that make a site a poor choice to link to. If you were to look at my queues, there's a wasteland of those sites that remain in limbo on the edge of acceptance or deletion. Some simply weren't ready for public viewing and I give those a second chance at a later date, some are broken (remember my niches are not filled with typical hard-core programmer-types), and some just don't smell quite right. Then there's the sites like the ones that led to this conversation that have fairly good content, are ad-heavy and may be on the edges of acceptability in terms of SEO practices. Those are the ones that always leave me in a quandary. Based on the responses here it seems if the site just doesn't feel right - it's out. I'm glad so many here feel that way. It gives me hope that there are truly other directory owners that are striving for quality over quantity and that I'm not the only one who's so picky about what sites are accepted.
In my opinion all Ads are fine, but only if they are well integrated into a web page layout. And when I say "well integrated" I don't mean having Ads links placed in strategic points of the web pages, so that the probability of a click is higher. I mean that webmasters should take a lot more into consideration the aesthetic aspect too and spend more time in making their layout more and more harmonious. Regards, Rommix
I also believe the ratio of the home screen real-estate is important. I would say no more than 20% or less devoted to ads is ok. Here is one I found that is the ultimate ad placement MFA, you can just see the header up top and the image is everything below and where the first blog post appears at the bottom: and here is some interesting directory use of adsense
Likewise. Sometimes I'm feeling brutal and I just go through them and get rid of all that chose to ignore the submission terms too blatantly, but there are always a few that are stuck in this limbo. I think it helps to assign a points system: more than three ads on a page, lose a point. Poor design? Lose another. Link farm section full of tons of unrelated links? Three strikes and you're out. Your method doesn't have to be all negative, or anything like as simple as that, but you get the idea. Developing your own scoring might help you speed up the review process.