Which directory should I submit too first...

im with stupid ^

 

your site is new so i think 1st u can submit your site in free directory. try to find new and free directory and submit your site to there.

 

I'm not in any position to discourage it. I don't know enough about it myself to really speak on it. I have read that it is "sitelinks", but I don't know why some sites have it, others don't, etc. So, I am not going to encourage or discourage something that I don't know the facts on either way.

 

Alive does not carry the same status with Google as does Yahoo. Yahoo is a recognised Authority Site. Alive is not an Authority Site. Do we really have to argue this point? But besides that I have no idea why Google does not like you. Maybe its the friends you keep. They are being particularly sly and covert and for good reason.

You have no idea how boring and taxing it is saying the same things over and over again but it would appear that some people are either bone stupid or downright dishonest or both.

 

Sorry we appear to have gone off topic. This is good advice.

 

Good advice indeed, remember not to submit to too many too quickly though, submit progressively over time to avoid any potential SE 'rapid link building' penalty, slow and steady is the way to build it up.

 

It seems the only one arguing this point is you...?

I find it funny how people like you come along ever so often claiming to be so righteous. I just looked through the "Latest Links" section of your directory and found the following sites listed:

online casino - http://www.gamblux.com
CreditCardsMadeSimple.info - http://www.CreditCardsMadeSimple.info
poker odds calculator - http://www.magicholdem.com

Those are quality resources?

Also, are the categories of your directory unique? Or is it just a spammy category dump?

Your directory has no design and is not properly edited. The one you should be casting stones at is, in fact, yourself.

Maybe minstrel should research who he defends instead of jumping on the bandwagon every chance he gets.

My advice to workshop: get a clue.

BTW, there is a "z" in recognized.

 

Directory Masters is a directory which has a category for Gambling sites. They requested that we review their site which we did. I have just had a quick look at the ones you mention and don't understand why you are having an attack of the vapours. Do you have a problem with Gambling sites?

We have used a template. Yes and its not a very good one but so what? It works and can be changed as we go along. The same with the graphics but why the concern? We aren't trying to con anyone into believing we are something we are not and the links still carry the same value as links in Alive. The only difference between the two is that we have a better chance of weathering the ravages of time and Director Masters offers contributors real long term value.

Why do you say not properly edited? And why should I not cast a stones? I have not lied, cheated or misrepresented myself to anyone. Granted I still have a lot of work to do but I seem to waste a hell of a lot of time on this forum because I believe people like you threaten my future. Thats also why I am in no hurry to change the look and feel on any of our web sites. I would hate anyone to think that I really do belong to the same club. And by the way you have just hijacked this thread again.

As for my spelling if I choose to spell it with an 's' just blame it on Uncle Sam. He has stuffed everything up and who really knows who is who or what goes where.
must remember spell check

 

You're wrong. Long before any webmaster used the term, Google used it in one of their patent applications.

Nonsense.

Not true. Which websites get sitelinks may be debatable to some extent. However, looking at those that do and those that don't, it's pretty clear that it has nothing to do with whether ot not it they are authority sites - in all likelihood, it has something to do with backlinks to and PR of internal pages.

Nope. In fact, DigitalPoint doesn't even get sitelinks.

Which is a misuse of the term, if any of those people are implying it's an authority site by Google's definition.

Glad to hear it. That's commendable. And no, that's not sarcasm. I mean it.

1. I'm hardly jumping on a bandwagon. I'm not saying anything recently I haven't said for years. I'm just aiming them at Google-gaming directories now and you don't want to hear what I have to say about that.

2. I'm not defending workshop - I'm agreeing with statements he's made in this thread. I've also disagreed with statements he had made in other threads. Check your facts.

How very uninformed and provincial of you.

In the US, it is most often spelled "recognized".

In the UK, it is most often spelled "recognised".

In Canada, both spellings are recognized - or recognised - as the case may be.

The US, contrary to what some seem to believe, is not the center of the universe.

 

I don't think workshop feels his poop doesn't stink as much as he is pointing out a flaw in the market ... much like everyone else does with Microsoft. And if he were to take his argument outside of the directory section of DP he would find many that agree with his statements. As it stands, it appears he is working from the inside out.

While I disagree with much of what Minstrel says, he gets kudos because he states his mind and doesn't care much about popular opinion. This makes him many friends and enemies. In the end, people appreciate a straight shooter.

 

Neither. Go for directories that offer permanent inclusion for their review fees.

 

Here try this one...

Add Url Links its currently FREE and offers more then most others at this time.
One off my favorites is Here and then Here..

Ok Ok shameless self promotion

thx
malcolm

 

Careful Chris, honesty doesn't go very far here! Seriously though, can we just stop the bashing and get along and help each other. DAMN I'm getting sick of reading this shit! It seems that every damn thread that's opened for whatever topic turns into a bashing session . . . . STOP!

 

I'm not attacking you. I was just pointing out some hypocrisy in your statements.

I have nothing against gambling sites, just the ways these sites are represented. Titles in lower case and URLs as titles aren't professional in my opinion.

The "big" picture here may be a little lost in translation.

You guys say Alive, Aviva, etc. are "google-gaming" their directories, but then say your own directory still carries the same "link value" as these directories. I think this misses the whole idea of directories. Directories are supposed to be for the end-user, not the webmaster. I know this isn't how things are currently, but that is the idea--the "big" picture. So your assumption that the template you use for your directory is not important to the overall value of your directory is an ignorant one, in my opinion. I would be much more apt to use Alive Directory over yours, just based on apperance.

If you had a choice, would you rather shop at Zappos or 23isBack.com with your decision based purely on appearance? I'm buying shoes from Zappos. The same idea applies to directories.

We are not making directories for submitters, but rather for users. We are not making directories for PR or link value, we are making them to be useful resources. But maybe the point here is that we are not doing these things. Well, you guys are... I don't have directories anymore.

minstrel,

I agree with you in theory. But in application, I think you have a condescending tone that is often praised because of its eloquence. You are right in what you say almost always; being intelligent renders such perks.

But it seems your opinions are always spoken second hand. If I say this person is wrong, you come in and say what I am saying, only much more brutal and demeaning. It just seems you never speak your mind unless there is an attack on someone--only when controversy is high.

I could be wrong and I'm sure in some ways I am. It's just something to think about.

As for the "z" and "s" comment... I got the feeling he was from America (after the Uncle Sam comment, I think I may be right). In the USA, recognized is spelled as such, as you have pointed out. And I don't think you can switch back and forth. As an American, can I spell recognized with an "s"? Would a college English professor mark it as a misspelling? It's not a retorical question. I find that interesting.

As for the "center of the universe" line, I would disagree to a certain extent. America is flawed in so many ways, but I do think most of the World does "revolve" around America to a certain extent.

 

Some of the people I work with speak English as a second language and its better that they don't started editing submissions. I am training them to spot MFA and affiliate doorways and this gets tough believe me. I am more interested in content than grammar.

Link building is a legitimate exercise and most of the search engines recognise this. We interact on the net. Its what makes the net tick. What Aviva and Alive were doing were saying is that their link is better than yours because they have hundreds of thousands of artificial back links. Whats more they were saying they have been recognised by Google, compete in the same league as Yahoo and were implying anyone can too if they buy their PR from them. So no, besides the fact we both offer webmasters the opportunity of securing another back link there is no similarity in the message we are sending out.

What I said is that anything and everything can and will change. This is the challenge each directory master faces and yes it will determine which ones eventually start passing traffic and which ones wont But that is still a long way off. Who uses the Yahoo directory to search for content? I certainly don't and if you are looking for the "big picture" the reality is that if we want to start passing traffic we need to beat Google at its own game. Thats what our workshop is all about, believe it or not.

And I suppose you would also argue that now is as good a time as any to deposit your life savings in Northern Rock? Whichever way you look at it you would be wrong. We offer a better price and the chances are we will still be steaming in ten years time. Appearances can be deceptive and that is precisely why we are doing things the way we are. Despite what Aviva might say about the melting ice caps no one needs to spend thousands of $$$ promoting a directory. The less you spend the better chance you have of making it through your first year. And if you want good advice concentrate on building genuine content and forget about the buyers. They will find you if you offer good long term value. They are not terminally stupid like some of the directory owners one bumps into.

Nope. South Africa and Thailand. But whilst you are about it you might like to run a spell check on your own post as there are some glaring errors there.

 

These both are good, but i send u a list of directories in attachment with excel sheet.

 

Hey... now thats an idea!

How many would be willing to "openly" report the amount of "rejected sites " submitted? any takers ?

Sounds like a nice mod to see who accepts anything just for that fast buck...

thx
malcolm

 

I think this is the root of the confusion here. I have never claimed Alive Directory to be better than anyone else's directory. As noted already in this thread, I have not claimed that Google has given it any special recognition or that it is in the same league as Yahoo. What I do is work hard and try to build a strong resource that offers as much benefit as possible for those that list in the directory, a convenient resource for those that browse it, and a categorized collection of sites to provide related listings search engines can analyze for relevance (I can't remember the word I wanted to use at the moment). As for the quality of the directory, I leave it to others to decide for themselves if a listing is beneficial for any particular business.

 

Doesn't wash. Aviva and Alive are like or were like two peas in a pod. You go everywhere together. Are you not aware of the existence of their list of Authority Sites? If you also have questions why did you not raise them, like the rest of us? Surely you understood what they were saying and how it was benefiting you and your business?

What about the MFA sites you approved that I kept subbing my toe on when I started going through your listings. Don't tell me you missed those as well? Someone whose judgement I respect referred me to a list of Trusted sites and it didn't take me long to start asking questions. Do you now understand the damage it did?

Instead of retreating into denial why don't you start saying the sort of stuff we need to hear? You have huge support in this forum and you could get things moving again if you have what it takes to admit and learn from the mistakes you have made.

 

I know about the list, and I have already replied to you why I did not make comments about it.

I do not dispute that there may be a few MFA sites listed, either because they have changed content since approval or they were accepted based on the content offered. What makes a MFA site is also subject to some debate. If a site does not contain adult content and offers useful information or a resource for other useful sites, it will usually be approved. However, the listings present in the site are by large high quality, I believe you will notice. Also, I am planning a system to facilitate re-reviewing listings already present periodically.