Back-button disabled = no listing ?

If a site prevents you from leaving it, i.e. the back-button is somehow disabled if you attempt to leave the site, is that reason enough by itself not to include such a site in the directory?

From a user point of view such sites are very annoying, and less experienced users might have difficulties understanding what is going on and how to overcome the problem by going back via the browsers drop-down list of sites visited.

Or could an otherwise contentrich and category-relevant site still be considered for inclusion in spite of such a flaw.

ranch said:

If a site prevents you from leaving it, i.e. the back-button is somehow disabled if you attempt to leave the site, is that reason enough by itself not to include such a site in the directory?

Click to expand...

No, but think of it as the equivalent of spitting in the umpire's eye after the second called strike. You'd just better hit the next pitch out of the park straight over second base, that's all. And don't even THINK of stepping out of the baselines.

Why would any self-respecting website owner do that?

Alucard]Why would [u]any[/u said:

self-respecting website owner do that?

Click to expand...

Maybe he/she thinks that if visitors are stuck on the site they will buy more

ranch said:

If a site prevents you from leaving it, i.e. the back-button is somehow disabled if you attempt to leave the site, is that reason enough by itself not to include such a site in the directory?

Click to expand...

Most of us open the site in a different browser window, so the back-button to leave the site being disabled wouldn't bother us. If, within the site, the back button didn't work, , or if the close window button were disabled, that would be annoying.

It still shouldn't prevent a listing, though.