my site rejected by botw - please help me

Calling it thievery is both offensive and completely wrong. I understand that it's frustrating for a webmaster to have a site rejected, but we are not looking to reject people and just keep their money. That's why we allow users to submit a replacement site, and always work with people to try to make them happy.

You need to step back and try to see things from our perspective. We are trying to build a directory that is high quality and useful to the average user as possible. Short term it would be much easier for us to just accept everything that gets submitted to make webmasters happy. But we choose to take the long view here. We have been around for a long time and are working hard to ensure we are around for a long time to come. The best way for us to do this is keep our standards high and ensure our directory is of the best quality we possibly can. By allow sites that don't meet our standards to be included we compromise the user experience and provide less value to the sites that are included.

 

Taking the $70 isn't both offensive and completely wrong? This particular website must have taken you about 5 seconds before you knew it wasn't up to par.

It's a ridiculous policy, and should be reversed in paypal for services not rendered unless you wrote to this guy your review.

How lengthy and in depth was your review? I really want to see this $70 review. If it was just an email saying something to the extent of "sorry your site is not up to par" with no guidelines of what to do in order to make it worthy then you stole $70.

That's what it is.

If your argument is he paid for a review not a link then where is it? If there is no review then you stole money.

 

yes where is the review? i can't it see it too.

 

Yes where is the evidence of a review?

 

hrmmm... I haven't submitted to botw yet.

I guess once I can start filling in the categories with more informative sites i will.

but for now, i'd just rather be safe about it than just throwing them a few bucks for free.

I did send a pm a good while back with regards to some questions i had, but unfortunately mistercharlie didn't answer. ah well...


now with regards to a review:

if there is infact a review, then there must be some sort of spec sheets correct?
if/when a site is rejected, should it not have a specifications sheet that tells the tale as to why it was rejected?

i mean hey, I for one would like to know what was reviewed and where was a site flawed if i submitted.

where is the review sheet?

 

donttrustthisposter, you are one of the members here I trust the most
As long as they state their policy very clear, botw can do what they want with their directory, they will have to accept that webmasters won't recommand them anymore, though. I for one submitted only once there and I still pay $39 a year, I think that's a good value but more than this I don't think it is worth it (I pay $300 a year for yahoo and 149 a year for business.com, so it is not that I don't want to reinvest)

 

Why do people waste their money on directories? Take your money and generate unique content, such as articles press releases or develop a unique tool. Your return will be much greater.

 

That's kind of like asking you... why is your rep RED ?

 

Policy is NOTHING.you can write whatever there.The point is it legal?If you are talking about a review,you have to show a review about that site,not only the reject reason.They have to show the review as they stated "review" in their TOS.

 

I just saw a hidden camera show ( boiling points ) where for ( less than a BOTW submission ironically ) people paid for a helicopter tour. Expecting to be taken around and seeing the sights from above, but the comic just showed them the helicopter. "here is the tail, nose, seats, etc" for a couple of minutes and then said "well there's your tour of a helicopter"

It was pretty funny and sure technically a "helicopter tour" ...legal...not a shot in hell.

OH...and after the punchline that it was a hidden camera show they were....drumroll....REFUNDED

 

Originally Posted by BOTWRob

Thanks for that and I have used the alternative. Lucky I guess.

I know some of you as we have been together I guess at DMOZ but DMOZ is FREE and BOTW is not. Why not relax the rules a little bit.

Yes its indeed a nice perspective but there are directories that are popping out with the same concept better innovations with high standards. Like I said its 2007 and most people are not using DIAL UP and WINDOWS 96 anymore.

What is value ? Financially, Humanly, or being Fair and Relax. Were just talking of LINKS aren't we and paying for it ?

Thanks

 

I din't look hard nor have I really been at botw that much, but lastnight I did check to see what kind of "quality" you say you list at that site and I just happened to click on the Game Category. What did I see? Two gambling sites as Sponsors, that I would never have approved (though money talk here )

 

Well thanks but no thanks... I will never submit to botw.
I could just as easily give my $$$ to my wife if I want it gone from my pocket...

 

Now if I appeal for a re-review on the same site. and say they reject it this time too. Will I get another chance or is that it.

 

This post made my damn day! I am really laughing out loud at this.

green added

 

If everyone had the same advertising strategy, the web would be one boring place.

 

I forgot where I saw it, but I'm pretty sure BOTW is against listing any directories other than the main ones.

http://botw.org/top/Computers/Internet/Searching_the_Internet/Directories/

As you can see, Alive and Aviva are NOT listed, and have to settle for the Sponsored Links section.

Bias I guess.

 

They list directories which have been around for ages and are recognized by Google. This is how you stay on top of the search engines yourself, by listing sites which Google likes. Sure, Aviva and Alive are liked by Google, but the question is how much a listing is worth in this category. Not sure how much the featured listings cost, but I´m sure that the benefit is there. I believe that you have to be careful listing the average DP member directories except maybe a few. If there is another mass ban on crap directories and 80 percent of directories listed get banned, you can bite the dust as well. Easily.

 

To be honest I really do not see anything wrong with excepting sites as sponsored listing, even if they may not be of the best quality that you can find. Major companies do this all the time, including business.com and yahoo. Google surely does not care what kind of site it is that's paying for their adwords as long as they get the money who cares. And just like botw.org, you can not just push your way to the top of google for the best keywords when your site is only a week old, so until your site gains a little more natural credit you will have to pay top dollar for a top listing. That's just business.

 

Actually, for anyone who has the time, I would recommend finding your own GOOD sites for regular listings and only selling sponsored ones.