Good Afternoon! We have previously submitted our site, http://www.slcash.com, but are having problems getting it in the directory. Our new site offers numerous resources for our industry. We sought out some great content and links to industry resources for our visitors, something that others in our proposed category I guess are reluctant to do. Please have a look and thanks in advance!
http://www.wegivecash.com
- Thread starter Regency
- Start date
Sorry! Here's the category:
http://dmoz.org/Business/Financial_Services/Loans/Payday_Advance_Services/
Thanks again
John
http://dmoz.org/Business/Financial_Services/Loans/Payday_Advance_Services/
Thanks again
John
bobrat
Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2003
- Messages
- 11,061
Could you please take the time to read the forum guidelines very carefully and post as requested. [Although it probably falls under the same caveat as www.slcash.com]
[readme]xxxxxx[/readme]
[readme]xxxxxx[/readme]
BobRat,
Sorry about not fully reading the quidelines. Just got a little excited when I realized I hadn't checked on our status. When you say that the site probably falls under the same caveat as our other site, what do you mean? That it also does not offer quality content? Please be sure and check out the following pages which we spent a good amount of time putting together:
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-resources.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-consumer-info.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-cash-advance-facts.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-fact-fiction.aspx
There traditionally isn't a large amount of positive info in our industry as we are the whipping dogs of the finance business, but we try and offer an objective perspective about the payday advance service.
Once again, if the site for some reason does not qualify for inclusion, please let me know what changes you would suggest as I take ODP quality guidelines as a good indication of actual quality of the site.
Thanks!
John
Sorry about not fully reading the quidelines. Just got a little excited when I realized I hadn't checked on our status. When you say that the site probably falls under the same caveat as our other site, what do you mean? That it also does not offer quality content? Please be sure and check out the following pages which we spent a good amount of time putting together:
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-resources.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-consumer-info.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-cash-advance-facts.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-fact-fiction.aspx
There traditionally isn't a large amount of positive info in our industry as we are the whipping dogs of the finance business, but we try and offer an objective perspective about the payday advance service.
Once again, if the site for some reason does not qualify for inclusion, please let me know what changes you would suggest as I take ODP quality guidelines as a good indication of actual quality of the site.
Thanks!
John
>Once again, if the site for some reason does not qualify for inclusion, please let me know what changes you would suggest
You must understand that this is a most meaningless request. The fundamental criterion for inclusion is "unique relevant content." The reason for rejection is "insufficient relevant content." The solution is "add relevant unique content." But how on earth could WE possibly know what unique content you have, and are willing to add to the website?
The status is "ineligible for listing". This status also applies to all sites that are "related" to this one by being (1) created by the same entity -- you and any associates (2) on the same general subject -- material about financial subjects.
This status also applies permanently, or until you understand why it applies. It will therefore be unnecessary to ask in the forums about this or any other related sites.
You must understand that this is a most meaningless request. The fundamental criterion for inclusion is "unique relevant content." The reason for rejection is "insufficient relevant content." The solution is "add relevant unique content." But how on earth could WE possibly know what unique content you have, and are willing to add to the website?
The status is "ineligible for listing". This status also applies to all sites that are "related" to this one by being (1) created by the same entity -- you and any associates (2) on the same general subject -- material about financial subjects.
This status also applies permanently, or until you understand why it applies. It will therefore be unnecessary to ask in the forums about this or any other related sites.
Why must you be so mean? Why do you always reply in such a demeaning fashion? I have followed the rules, waited a month between reuqests, yet you still decide to be rude. I will never ask again. You have now completely soured me to the ODP, as both a business owner and a former user of the ODP.
I have added additional content to the site for our users, more than any of the other sites that you currently have in that category (the same sites that I constantly have to send DMCA requests to their hosts due to copyright infringement). I could care less what any ODP editor thinks about the site, only the amount of content that we offer that SHOULD merit our inclusion into the ODP.
Since you simply refuse to be polite as I have been to you, I thought that I would focus on the sites that you have added (God only knows what they had to do to be included). I especially like this one, http://www.cash--advance.biz. What an original site! You must have a rigorous review process to include such a high quality site. Five pages of utter nonsense, and they are an affiliate site at that! I know because they send US their leads. You guys have doen a great job! Keep up the good work.
I have added additional content to the site for our users, more than any of the other sites that you currently have in that category (the same sites that I constantly have to send DMCA requests to their hosts due to copyright infringement). I could care less what any ODP editor thinks about the site, only the amount of content that we offer that SHOULD merit our inclusion into the ODP.
Since you simply refuse to be polite as I have been to you, I thought that I would focus on the sites that you have added (God only knows what they had to do to be included). I especially like this one, http://www.cash--advance.biz. What an original site! You must have a rigorous review process to include such a high quality site. Five pages of utter nonsense, and they are an affiliate site at that! I know because they send US their leads. You guys have doen a great job! Keep up the good work.
I think you've mistaken my post for phatic discourse, which was not my intention.
I related and even more serious communication gap is caused by the definition of "content": what we mean is "information" and not "promotional advertising marketing". You're churning out the former (with what success can be best judged by the plagiarism you are suffering.) But our editors were looking (in vain) for the latter.
The two types of writing are so different that there are few masters of both. (I've tried promotional, and I simply cannot do it: so I appreciate the difficulties that other people may have either writing or reading informative content.) But ... the ODP only indexes sites with the latter.
I do appreciate the tip about the other URL: I've re-reviewed the site, and it definitely should not be listed in its current state and under our current guidelines.
I related and even more serious communication gap is caused by the definition of "content": what we mean is "information" and not "promotional advertising marketing". You're churning out the former (with what success can be best judged by the plagiarism you are suffering.) But our editors were looking (in vain) for the latter.
The two types of writing are so different that there are few masters of both. (I've tried promotional, and I simply cannot do it: so I appreciate the difficulties that other people may have either writing or reading informative content.) But ... the ODP only indexes sites with the latter.
I do appreciate the tip about the other URL: I've re-reviewed the site, and it definitely should not be listed in its current state and under our current guidelines.
Hutchenson,
I appreciate your response. You must understand that I look at the ODP as a valued source of traffic, and of course every webmaster feels his site should be included. I don't expect that you know what content we have added. We have continued to add more resources for our visitors and not for a submission to the ODP. I only would ask that you take a look at the true merits of our site:
1.It is not a mirror site. Our other URL slcash.com, is not live anynmore and the site it redirects to, we have not submitted to the ODP.
2.Our site contains 100% original content. We use an in house copywriter who adds new content weekly. Our content is not repetitive like, say for instance, http://www.ezpaydaycash.com, who has merely duplicated the same pages and inserted different keywords oneach. I think that makes for good SEO, but certainly reduces the quality of a site. We stay away from such tactics and create original content to inform our visitors.
3.We have not disguised our submission. We have not submitted the same URL more than once.
4.Our site does not redirect to anyother site.
5.We have no illegal content.
6.Our site is not under construction.
7.Our site has no pornographic content.
8.Our site is not non-english; therefore it has been submitted properly.
9.Our site has only 1 affiliate link, and we only rpovide it for applicants who do not qualify for our services.
I think that we have covered our bases, and we continue to add more and more content for our users. I would appreciate it if you would let me know if any of the above is not in order.
Thanks,
John
I appreciate your response. You must understand that I look at the ODP as a valued source of traffic, and of course every webmaster feels his site should be included. I don't expect that you know what content we have added. We have continued to add more resources for our visitors and not for a submission to the ODP. I only would ask that you take a look at the true merits of our site:
1.It is not a mirror site. Our other URL slcash.com, is not live anynmore and the site it redirects to, we have not submitted to the ODP.
2.Our site contains 100% original content. We use an in house copywriter who adds new content weekly. Our content is not repetitive like, say for instance, http://www.ezpaydaycash.com, who has merely duplicated the same pages and inserted different keywords oneach. I think that makes for good SEO, but certainly reduces the quality of a site. We stay away from such tactics and create original content to inform our visitors.
3.We have not disguised our submission. We have not submitted the same URL more than once.
4.Our site does not redirect to anyother site.
5.We have no illegal content.
6.Our site is not under construction.
7.Our site has no pornographic content.
8.Our site is not non-english; therefore it has been submitted properly.
9.Our site has only 1 affiliate link, and we only rpovide it for applicants who do not qualify for our services.
I think that we have covered our bases, and we continue to add more and more content for our users. I would appreciate it if you would let me know if any of the above is not in order.
Thanks,
John
Submission Status - WeGiveCash.com
Just checking in. Would love to hear some great news! We have continued to add more resources for visitors including:
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-resources.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-consumer-info.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-cash-advance-facts.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-fact-fiction.aspx
Please let me know if we are scheduled for inclusion.
Just checking in. Would love to hear some great news! We have continued to add more resources for visitors including:
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-resources.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-consumer-info.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-cash-advance-facts.aspx
http://www.wegivecash.com/payday-loan-fact-fiction.aspx
Please let me know if we are scheduled for inclusion.
http://www.wegivecash.com/ is still waiting for review in Business: Financial Services: Loans: Payday Advance Services, along with a large number of other sites.