It's a good start, these are the sort of things that link buyers are going to want to bear in mind. The one thing I would say is, the v7n advertisement is a little too close to the blacklist, it almost looks as though it's part of the list if you're not paying too much attention.
Don't forget www.seoposting.com -- Sponsor links for Alive and Directory Dump are removed and he won't talk about it. Scams submitters too. He approves sites so the email goes out, then removes the link, again he and refuses to answer emails. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=344294
www.avivafind.com with no sponsor links in the footer? Whose template is this? http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=328071 Rushing off to register avivaclone . . . . ROFLMAO
I find this whole imitation thing so sad. Why can't people come up with their own stuff. I knew kids like that in school who always tried to copy someone else's style. Seem some never grow out of it.
What irks me most is the CLONING--are they so poor in their mind that they have to clone a name? As soon as they bought that DOMAIN-they looked SPAMMY. Who will submit to them??
To avoid the issue of a single individual deciding whether a directory should be blacklisted, why not set up a completely separate site that will allow you to form a community. For instance, something like directory critic, digg, and the blacklist idea combined. Users can nominate shady directories and then it will be up to the community to decide its fate (there must be a valid reason in order for a site to be nominated). Proof will be posted along with the nomination, and if there are enough votes, the directory will be added to the list. Otherwise, it'll be set free. Just a thought.
I think it's a good idea to let people know which directories or should we say directory owners are complete morons.
www.forplex.com has the new mod where you can search for all sites submitted by the same guy. Maybe Pete can install something like a rating system.
i think its a good idea,especially if there are owners that delete links that was paid for as metioned in post above
Great thought... In addition we should also decide the parameters that would result in blacklisting a particular directory..some of them have been already mentioned like: - Removing links Template sponsor link Directory Script link Paid links Exchanged links - Copying template - Fraudulent submissions - Unethical SEO practices Any other parameter please feel free to add. For any suspect / shady directory, we could then collect / display the respective proof.
This is simple. When someone makes an innocent mistake they correct it when contacted about it. If it's a dishonest action, they refuse to correct it. And for the record, the big fish isn't picking on anyone. It's not a secretive accusation, the evidence is put out there for all to see. I'd trust a list of this type a lot more knowing that it is being compiled by someone with the expertise to really know the directory niche. If someone is put on the list all they have to do is clean up their act and make things right if I understand correctly. Aviva did provide a way for those on the list to contact them and work it out, didn't they? Aviva is taking a brave step for the protection of directory owners and submitters alike. I don't think it's fair to expect him to let a group of us decide that he needs oversight before he can put the information on his website. Would any of us allow that kind of oversight of content before placing anything on our sites? ....I seriously doubt it. Keep in mind that all this information is already out there. All you have to do is search this forum.
Perfect post. Also will you add FinditFred and GeneralDirectory.Org as sitewide listings within those directories had been removed. Thanks
Are there legal liabilities of publicly putting together a list of companies that you are advising people not to do business with? While I am not a lawyer, it would seem to me that you are taking a chance by potentially interfering with people's livelihoods. Mess around with people's money, and they are sure to bite back. While your intentions may be noble, I think you are starting down a VERY slippery slope. Tread lightly...
People don't have the right to steal templates and sell links that they don't provide. If someone's livelihood depends of theft I don't see the problem with messing with it. As far as biting back, if this list tells us which directory owners have demonstrated that they steal and cheat after they have stolen and cheated, who exactly is biting back? Are you confusing the thief with the victim?