This is just an example. You didn't get my point. Sometimes, a page can contain enough information on a subject which makes it suitable to be added as a listing not as a deep link (of course not that web directory page). I not going to argue this with an experience ex-dmoz editor. In that case, you can't find deep links for a single page. my 2 cents. Guys, you can go back to the topic of the thread.
Sorry mhamdi, I guess I didn't get your point because the example didn't fit the point you were trying to make. Now that I see what you're trying to say, I can agree with you. We do list deeplinks as a main listing when we find them valuable. When we list a deeplink in a category we do not add additional deeplinks to it. I didn't know we were arguing. Sorry if it came off that way.
I think they shouldnt. Web directories are intended to help end users. I see no point in having deep links all using the same URL with different anchor text - just to improve google results
Let me ask you who you are providing the deeplinks for? The submitters benefit or that of your visitors? As a surfer, wouldn't you feel a bit deceived if you clicked those links expecting something specific and instead was directed to the homepage repeatedly? Not a very useful resource if you ask me.
well, don't think there is anything wrong with providing the deeplinks for the submitters as well is there? Directories do serve dual purposes... I understand your point, but it could also tell the user that what he wants is there right? For example he maybe looking for camera products, but the title of the site is 'electronic products'. Then when he sees the deeplink with 'camera products', he will know instantly that the site has what he wants. I just think that there is more than one way of looking at things and not everything is black and white, a clear right or wrong answer....
Why not link to the camera products page with an appropriate title instead of the home page so that he can go directly to the page/topic/section of the site he's most interested in? Not everything is black and white or a clear right or wrong answer - but there is common sense. And it tells me that linking 5 different titles to the same url doesn't qualify as "Site Resources" but rather delivers sole benefits to your submitters and not your users, unless of course they're one and the same. Just my opinion, and you wanted to hear from everyone.
yes, i honestly do but its ok to discuss differing opinions right? back to the topic, even so, is there anything wrong with having the deeplinks benefit only the submitter in this case? Afterall, they are our customers and we are providing a service. You make it sound like its so wrong to benefit the submitters
I guess if that's whom you're building your directory for then it's your prerogative to do so. If your target market is those who are primarily seeking benefits of anchor text for search engines and your service is geared towards selling links, then you would want to provide the benefit to the submitter over any possible visitors/users. I'm not suggesting that my methods are correct, just rather reflect my goals. I don't disrespect anyone's business model or methods for building, operating or maintaining a directory, but do like to engage in useful discussion and debate when it can provide a benefit to myself or others. Any time I can come away from a discussion with more knowledge and insight, I consider it as positive. I'll get out of the way and hope others will also contribute some more opinions.
Not exactly. If you view the Yahoo! Directory, they sell their service by offering exposure to the submitter's. Is that not the purpose of deep links? Extra exposure to areas of your website you feel that are important enough. Directory owners who charge a profit should be doing both. Offering service to your submitter and visitors. Eversince this whole scare thing going on with Google, everyone is so against things that "may manipulate SE's" The fact is, directory owners are like lawyers. They take a system with a set of rules and try to find loopholes to take advantage of the system. That being said, the concept of what certain directories are doing are doing just that. Take Yahoo! Dir as an example again. Are they essentially not selling links? Nope. They are selling reviews. So why can't small directory owners just claim the same thing? If you ever look at some of the discussions where someone asks "Is it worth submitting to Yahoo!", what are the usual responses? The only thing that makes it "worth it" is because of the link juice given from the backlink you receive. You rarely ever see people say , yeah pay $299 a year because you will get such good traffic. Just like how bidding directories BS about traffic, Yahoo! Dir is also BSing about traffic. And any real SEO knows that Yahoo! Dir is worth it only because of the link juice given back. If they used a nofollow link or a javascript link, how much profit will they lose? And why do they charge $600 a year for adult sites? Is the review process that different? Probably not. So to summarize everything, Ignore Google like they tell you to (build for your visitors, not SE's). Run your business your own way, for your submitters and visitors. If you buy a link for advertisement from a PR7 or PR8 site, that does not exactly mean your "manipulating serp's". All it means is you happen to want to advertise on a very high quality site that happens to be a high PR site. Big whoop. Now if you go on buying these type of links and then advertise your directory soley base on your "HIGH PR" that was attained from these high PR links, then now that poses a problem. Now that right there breaks the rule. So be a good lawyer, make sure the loopholes you take advatange of always remain safe and not breaking the law.
Of course it can be done silly boy ? That's when you have less links and just good on cut and paste. Punctuations, Capitalizations, Descriptions, Titling. No speak english much here and don't use exotic words like a wannabe but trying very best. Ok back on ignore list mode again.