I appreciate the effort your making to provide a resource for high quality directories even though I don't agree with your ranking system which seems completely based upon PR..
Guys, I am not gonna make You change Your mind as for PR being not the only factor that defines great directories, as well as I am not going to enumerate the criterias which we followed while selecting directories. I am also not going to list the directories with PR5 once again, which we didn't add to GreatDirectories.org. If You consider a listing fee to be the major factor (more important than PG and popularity) that determines submission of a particular directory to the list of Great Directories - that's Your right and Your business. You may think whatever You want.
why there are Social Networks sites in the list of directories? - do they have anything to do with web-directories?
Mr MG, from your page of free directories, del.ico.us is a social bookmarking site and Digg is a content voting site and cannot be counted as free directories, so u might want to edit them
Ok I have an issue with these 'quality sites'. Now I'm all for sites like JoeAnt and Gimpsy (I'm listed in Gimpsy myself), but since when do general directories ever rate as something quality, which is determined by a false quality indicator such as Google PR. Eg: cantufind.com - General directory $49.99 / Unlimited (Hey, I know that Guy) ..........so cantufind is a quality directory, okay fine. In what way I see no restricted criteria for selection of sites for within cantufind (sorry Jamie, but I don't.) It has a low Alexa Rank compared to many other sites and few sites listed anyway (just an observation), so based on that it appears to not have many submitters, or those who submit a quality or specialist site there. Or what about: xwebdirectory.com General directory $39.95, $79.95 Submit website. ~ so if I go to the 2 above mentioned, you're telling me because their listed in your Greatdirectories site this must guarantee they are of quality or got a respectable amount of quality sites listed within themselves as part of the criteria of selection? But they aren't really quality sites are they - they are General directories, and clearly sell themselves on mass listings of sites, not the quality aspect. Unless I missed something. Excuse me, but I quote from Greatdirectories.org: Firstly, they need carefully collected, high-quality sites; secondly They need links to their sites from the directories to increase PR of their sites. In the first case the directories must be very popular and frequently visited. Since when does a ton of directory links to increase PR, mean a site is quality, sorry I don't buy it or anything that guarantees quality directories in this site. A rating system based strongly on false PR manipulation isn't trustworthy. this criteria is fine, as long as the quality listing service conforms to it. And there are too many general standard directories listed that detracts from the quality goal here.
Red_Virus и Rodegee, please, see this Thread as the answer: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=843659
these are the results of american hosting-provider' lousy service www.hostrocket.com. I have already regret I got in touch with it. By the way, hostrocket.com is also down...
Maybe you should add hosting as a factor ? any way intersted to see you answer to EK's Q or are you skirting that. For me it's not a site i favour as it seems to push the PR button to hard so i moved on with no interst in the site. Thats just me and every success with your site.
swedal, about a year ago it was a very good hosting. I was buying accounts for my sites in many hosting providers, including GoDaddy. At that time HostRocket was one of the most qualitative hosters. Than it had its site redesigned and the quality of their service decreased abruptly.
I wouldn't mind so much if when entrepreneurs do this, they make the directory different. This Greatdirectories site is no different to anything else out there, it seriously isn't. But to then not be clear about what selection criteria is used to determine quality , I mean aren't you trying to sell this concept and get it filled, to the point where it begins to be useful? I mean I don't work for MI5 or anything, but secrecy about how one provides a quality service is crazy. Why not disclose a basic thing like that gets out raincoat, dons sunglasses.......
That's a bit rich coming from someone who took as long as you did to come out with your wonder of the world isn't it. As for your comments on cantufind they haven't gone unnoticed and as and when I have the time and inclination I will definitely respond to you.
Event_King, in fact, i don't have any secrets. Me and my colleagues don't pursue commercial objects. Moreover, the only purpose of GreatDirectories.org is to provide visitors with urgent information as for great directories. We were trying to make the process as useable as possible...so that the most important and significant data about each directory could be arranged in one line. We don't claim GreatDirectories.org to be unique - this site was grown out of our selection of the most quality directories for human registration of sites. This list of directories was growing larger and larger... But later we faced a very significant problem that had been decreasing utility of all the lists of web-directories (even the most carefully selected ones). This was information about directories becoming out of date. Registration guidelines and fees often change; some directories stop All these factors result in that list of directories, published in forums and blogs become useless within some time. E.g. they still can be used for registering sites, but it becomes ineffective. To solve this problem, we decided to make our list of directories online, for public review. While constantly registering our own sites in these directories, we pick out idle directories to review and correct their information. As a result, You get authentic and trustworthy information, but not a medley of various directories (including free and paid ones) having a great deal of inactive links. I've mentioned a lot about the criterions that served as a basis of our collection of quality directories in my previous answers. Thanks to all those, who have expressed or will express their thoughts as for this site. Your opinion is of great importance for us, because at present time we develop a new, more usable and profitable GreatDirectories.org version.
Hang on, you don't own Cantufind, you said so in a post, huh? lol Getting wound up over somethng you don't own, heck it's your stress levels not mine lol.
Well good luck then That's good...... but..... are you sure that's the only reason? because you then say: You can see how it might look right You see I don't have a problem with genuine quality services, but so many say that all the time, only for visitors to discover they are nothing more than cash eaters. Things like "We wll dramatically improve search, like never before" or something, but it rarely happens. It's qute funny, oh, not that it fails as the intentions for creation are there - just that big idea is never there, and that's the hilarious part. I got to say this, as there's a lot of truth in it, and it's with all these directories currently folding so fast, why bother ranking or listing things that won't be around after 2 years. That might explain why there aren't many directory of directories sites, it clearly doesn't work as the interest in general directories isn't there, apart from the hungry freebie hunters, and noone cares about them anyway - they never pay for anything so it amazes me the time/effort taken to open the door to them. See, now that's amusing because directory owners are just being used, not right, but the way of the world. The search world is so done to death now, over the last 10 years everything has been covered, so the opportunity to 'get rich' is so dead, and it's a case of the blind leading the blind. I don't think that normal search is the way anymore, it certainly has lost a lot of appeal for entrepreneurs, and the only winners are the ones that suss this out and do something different. Youtube anyone...... but give it time and even youtube will be considered boring and old hat. But keep that intrinsic motivation running and some day everyone will have a directory - oh, they have already