While google doesn't give their algo out people know how to manipulate PR .... buying textlinks like many webmasters do. We all know the general concept. It would be nice to know what is the general concept behind DR. All I see is Directory Journal on the top since always is it because it have a high PR ? and tons of Categories ?? I am surprised not to see Yahoo, BOTW, and Business Directory.... Perhaps Directoryrate doesn't consider them directories.. who knows I am thinking that the developers might say that we only add directories that are submitted to us so as a test I have added botw.org and lets see how that works.
Hi guys, nice to see my little site stirring up some controversy Some people seem to take the DR more seriously than others, the fact is its just a metric to try and assist users in seeing quickly what maybe a good directory, if you dont agree with its scores than thats OK. Since its launch, feedback has been split between those who accept it as simply a site that lists directories, and those that seem to want to attack it, which was something I wasnt expecting when it was started up. Why some want to tear it to peices I dont know, we're not claiming to be authorative in rating directories, we just provide a list that maybe useful, and most people take it as being just that. The DR algo has always been kept to ourselves, and will remain that way to prevent manipulation. I guess its flattering if nothing else that some are willing to spend their own time trying to figure out what makes up the DR scores. The Horses Arse (sorry head)
I guess it was you who posted the red saying 'looking for a fight for no reason'? Sign your name next time huh! As for tearing your site apart, that isn't my intention, if you were a little more consistent and actually bothered answering your mails then people like me wouldn't feel compelled to work out how you reach your conclusions. Whilst I won't be able to work out your "Algos" I can certainly eliminate what you don't take into account. There's two ways this can be done, the polite way as I intended or if your going to spout off then I just might be of the mind to be hypercritical and reveal exactly why I think a certain way regarding your so called algo but backing it up with facts. I'd much prefer the polite way which is why I never gave you red back. @smub and malcolm; I don't for one second expect people to reveal what they claim to be their algo's, I'm with smub on this one where it would simply be nice to have at least some idea of what is taken into consideration. After all Google tell you what they take into account without revealing their algos don't they. Back to wayner; I can tell you that I've already ruled out for certain particular factors, perhaps working with me as opposed to against me would be the order of the day. Either way I'm going to complete my task out of sheer curiosity if nothing else. Back to Malcolm; Its Sherlock Holmes; Watson made the coffee.
Just to clear one thing up... the red wasn't from me, I have never given red to anybody and generally don't do the rep thing much at all, you need to look elsewhere for your culprit...
Good for you, the less rep sissies around here, the better. BTW, do you really feel like you're getting "attacked" all the time? That could be a case of paranoia. Certainly people are entitled to critique your methods.
I had meant to post earlier today and simply didn't have the time. After one of the monthly updates, I got curious and looked to see how my sites faired in the ratings. I was greatly disappointed to see where my site fell in the Arts category. I was listed below several sites that I did not think matched up to mine by any ranking factor you could think of. I emailed and asked why and what I could do to improve. Got a Google-esque can't tell you type of notice which I admit greatly pi**ed me off. So, I went and did my own research on the sites listed and got even madder about the list and realized some of the other sites had an equal if not bigger beef than I did. When the next month's update came around, I noticed the entire category had been shuffled around (all 7 of us). While I would love to see my site in the top spot, the list does now better represent the way most people use in determining the value of a site. Again, not necessarily how I would evaluate a site but factoring in some of the more "measurable" metrics my list was almost identical to what is listed now. Overall, at least in the Arts category the order is somewhat fair - I don't really see uniqueness or extra content coming into play though. I can't really judge as to how the scores relate to the rest of the list but I do think the niche sites are graded much lower than general ones. If I were to guess that would be due to an over-reliance on backlink counts and total number of listings being used in the calculations.
Getting close there YMC, they certainly don't take site quality into account. Report will take a few days as I want to be as thorough as possible.
Like YMC, I notice that niche directories tend to have significantly lower scores. PR also appears to make up part of the equation, but a small one. I also notice that very few directories get rated at all, so that can't account for much. Rather than analysing what makes up the algo, which could change in any case, I'd like to know more about what DR consider to be the elements of a good directory. How do they rate freshness, editorial strictness, design, usability, size, traffic, wait times, etc, in importance?
That's actually the main reason I'm looking at this site Obelia, I'm simply not interested in the so called rating system it counts for nothing, certainly not to me. Here's what I found they DON'T take into account, I'll do a full blog when I'm done. 1. They don't' take into account w3c standards, either CSS or HTML 2. They don't take into account age of a domain. 3. They don't take into account adsense, (one site in my trial has three blocks of adsense in every page). 4. They don't take into account editorial standards or content. The list of what they don't take into account goes on and on, I'm narrowing it down to what is left now so that whatever it is must be the answer. Well at least that's the theory.
well my first entry went well.. I submitted Botw.org to Directoryrate because they didn't included it in the list. Well turned out that BOTW.org is ranked at 7.8 at #35 from the top. Now give me a break ... this is one of the directory giants out in the webmaster world aside from yahoo and business.com .... saying that botw.org ranks below directoryjournal or anyother directory that is on the top is just making a mockery of the service itself. I believe that there is no real algo or script that is behind this. It can possibly be the personal discretion of the owner of the site. Next entry submitted .. Yahoo.com (lets see how well that works out) because I know that there is no other directory with more content than yahoo.com !!!
Jamie, i can not recall if i read that yo going to start your own ratings over and above the reviews ? if so doing the review or what ever you want is fine for background work, but where is there any merit in using that to jump on one system to push another ? Would it not be better to just blog about the positives of what your system does and has to offer and maybe in addition your reviews could be built into the rating system where you can value add to your rating by offering the review completing a valued package ?
You read wrong. Someone posted sarcastically that next thing that would happen would be 'Jamie Rating' to which I replied, at least if I did my ratings would be based on fact not fiction, or words to that effect. Not sure I get what your saying here? The only system I have is to be absolutely thorough with a review and offer critique not criticism. I was considering on adding a fully qualified SEO viewpoint to the reviews as well, that way I get to help on both what you can and can't see. Not sure on that though, we'll see how that idea pans out.
Nice to see this thread still going strong Smub, the Yahoo directory wont be listed on the site, its not representative of the kind of directory we would list for what I hope are obvious reasons, but if your interested I did run a DR score on it... 9.8
Was that because you counted its own backlinks as you certainly don't appear to take much else into account. Unless that's of course friends and family.
Alright wayner... I thought your site had some value but sad to see you don't even agree with your home page text. Now I am very sure that hundreds others will come here and say that Yahoo Directory is a useful source.... It is a Directory first of all and you are listing directories, so I don't know what is a reason for not including their directory. Promoting your site across the internet ?? I don't know any other directory which have a wider audience than yahoo directory. Free and Paid link methods ... Yahoo have both. Search Engine Marketers / Optimizers both submit to Yahoo Directory .... Unless you want to put on your homepage that we will reject sites without telling you a valid reason. All sites listed on Directory Rate are our friends who are benefiting us some how. Since large corporate is no use for us we won't list them in this service. It is like Google saying we are not giving Yahoo any PR because Yahoo is their competitor lol.
Can i ask if yahoo submitted the site ? if not would it not be carless of a directory owner to submit sites that rocked up from anyone. further to that if i had some one pis farting with me just to play games i would not list the site up. There must be a line somewhere in the sand. If you think i'm wrong yell out and i will happily submit 100 sites a day to your directory based on theory it;s ok, then complain in public when you don't list them all. Not taking sides, just calling it as it is, and just perhaps if people focused on their own directories / sites they would be better spending their time.
and just perhaps if people focused on their own directories / sites they would be better spending their time. I agree with that.If the owner of the site make his algo based on the facts that he thinks are important for a directory then if you dont think is worth ,you dont take it seriously.if you are ofended by the results you asked him to remove your directory.
The problem is scoobby, the owner doesn't base the so called 'algo' on many, if any 'facts', more like fiction if my results are anything to go by, I'm trying to be as concise as possible before revealing my findings. The only conclusive fact to come out so far is that wayner by a long way discounts more than he counts in the method he uses. The one good thing to come from this is he hasn't charged anything for listings which is the one reason I'm just analysing out of curiosity as opposed to malice.