Hear about directory owners complaining against thoughtless submitters and spammers is really common and they're normally right. But, pitifully, find web directories that don't show any kind of respect to submitters and reviewers is evenly common. Dismissing hacked web directories, broken captchas, wrong modrewrites,etc, I'm finding a lot of web directories which ask for register before show me their available submission types or prices, and I'm seeing that this oversight isn't taken as such by the directory owners. As I'm reviewing web directories (for linksadmin.net), I thought in remove these directories from the directory list, but, I wonder if it can reduce the directory list usefulness (because some "wrong directories" seem to be quite popular) Can someone give me some good advice? Thanks in advance.
If you are reviewing directories, why not include this in your review or make a category/column regarding registration?
I'm worried about removing mentioned directories could negatively affect on the quality of my directory list. I also tried to contact each directory owner suggesting fix the oversight, but I can't do it forever. Thanks for your advice, I will. But I consider that a directory which ask for register before show us its available submission types could be useless for most submitters, Am I right?
They way I look at it there are enough good working directories out there that you don't need to include broken or hacked directories in your list. Just delete them. The people who are running a real directory would notice it's broken within a day or two. I figure that I might lose a few good directories because it happened to be down at the moment I was doing the review, but the directory owner could always add their directory back to the list when they got it working again.
You could require that if a directory needs registration they have to include on your submission page a log in you can use to review the site. I can't really see what you mean by an 'oversight' if they require registration that's their choice but it will severely impact on the amount of submissions they get.
at least directory owners should tell if the directory is paid or not and the price before registration. I usually ignore those unclear directories...
i usually never create an account, if it needs registration before submitting i usually skip it, maybe you can just make a different category for these dirs..
It's your list, so it's your rules Pibepalo. In your place I would definitely dismiss hacked directories. As far as ones with script errors, there's degrees. If the directory has errors in obvious places, and the submission form doesn't work at all, then don't include it. But bear in mind that few dynamic websites are immune from glitches, so it's up to you to judge how small the problem is. Requiring registration isn't popular. Perhaps keep these on a separate list, or put in a filter so people can exclude these from the displayed list?
depends, I wouldn't ignore them at first, but if the problems persist then what else is wrong with the directory, probably they're not reviewing either ...
Golly, I thought I was offering a decent suggestion here but obviously someone's not a fan as their unsigned red rep would indicate, though they are obviously a coward and would appear to not like fluffy kittens or old female dogs. Gotta say, it's never a dull moment around here. lol
Thank you for your answers. For the time being I´ve just flagged them as a new directory type as was adviced. Requiring register to submit is fully respectable, but unclear directories which don't show available submission types (before ask for register) will be temporarily blacklisted, it's a pity, but submitters and reviewers shouldn´t deal with this kind of oversights.
I've never really understood the rationale for requiring registrations. The directory owner is already getting an email address to add to whatever list they may use it for and allowing submitters to edit their own listings just seems to be asking for someone to do something crazy. Hiding the registration requirement seems even more unlikely to garner trust and I like your idea of blacklisting those that do. It's also nice to see someone making a directory list who has actually visited and submitted to the directories; so many of the directory lists are based on who can create the longest list.