Status Of Site

T

Tigermanz

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
74
Could some Editor Or Meta advise us where we stand.. Someone Mentioned on a chat site that we may have been banned. :confused:

Any help would be appreciated.
 
T

Tigermanz

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
74
B

brmehlman

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
3,080
While the tricks you're using to show one thing to spiders and another to users don't bother us in and of themselves, they seem to be making it difficult to navigate your site with some browsers. At least two editors have had enough trouble that they weren't able to review it.

Nevertheless it (the real url) is still awaiting review in the lingerie category. When an editor with a browser it's compatible with happens along, it will no doubt be reviewed.

The backlog in the category is only moderate, but because of the browser compatibility issues it might not be a bad idea to wait several months between status requests.
 

While the tricks you're using to show one thing to spiders and another to users don't bother us in and of themselves
Click to expand...

Well, if that's going on, what's going to convince us that you'll show the same content to ODP editors that Google or AOL visitors will see? It's a common trick, try to fool the editors with one page that doesn't show up when you look through Google for the same site.
 
B

brmehlman

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
3,080
I suppose I should clarify what I mean by "tricks ... don't bother us". The hidden text in this site, an article on the origins and history of fetishes with a bunch of underwear related keywords randomly interspersed, is not grounds for not listing the site. We list or not, and describe, based on what the user sees, not what the spiders see.

But kctipton is quite right, such tricks arouse suspicion. If you're trying to fool Google, you might very well try to fool us too. When I see something like this on a site I'm reviewing, I review the site very carefully. And I make a note to myself to review it again an unspecified amount of time later.
 
T

Tigermanz

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
74
I appreciate both your comments.

I myself am not a web site designer or optomiser, but an owner and product seller.

We commissioned a third party to build this site, and I would also welcome any future checks after review as we have nothing to hide.

All we ask is a non biased relevant review.
No "Tricks" are intended.
We would appreciate the "Real URL" being reviewed and I will investigate how to transfer the other URL to point to the site directly.

If you check Whois you will see the same person (Me) own them both, so no foul play is intended.

Again Thank you for your help and comments as your experience is a valuable asset and you have pointed out a few points that I never would have known existed.

:)
 
Jezebel

Jezebel

Curlie Meta
Joined
Jun 22, 2002
Messages
558
Rimba was listed almost a month ago in the category you stated. VideoShack is still waiting for review.
 
T

Tigermanz

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
74
Rimba, Great. Thanks for your help.

Fingers crosses for Videoshack.co.uk

Another Happy Webmaster.
:D
 
T

Tigermanz

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
74
This thread seems to have droped down the list a bit without any reply.

Can anyone advise on the previous request?

Thanks

Tigermanz
:)
 
This site has been archived and is no longer accepting new content.
Top