motsa Posted October 15, 2002 Posted October 15, 2002 You can make me the subject of your ire all you like. I don't deserve it, though, because I was just trying to offer you an idea of why an editor may choose not to add your site. I was not and am not the editor reviewing your site for inclusion.
Guest raymonds Posted October 15, 2002 Posted October 15, 2002 "However, if 10w40 can't cut it as a valid content site, it is really a statement about directory sites entirely..." ~ It is. This is a fact Yahoo, MSN, Altavista, etc. have all been facing for a while, and you can see it in their steadily increasing number of premium services. Money can be made in advertising, but there isn't much left after the affiliate administrator takes their cut. Premium services or referrrals to inside sales (e.g. your own product or service) are what brings in a profit.
Guest tac2502 Posted October 18, 2002 Posted October 18, 2002 www.10w40.com - No Advertising kctipton, I'm sure you'd like to close the door on this one, but let me give it one more try. As everyone here should know, one of the most important measures for inclusion is not whether or not the site has advertising (either affiliate or other method) but whether or not the content is unique and has value. As an exercise for myself, I've duplicated the site without ads. Any place where an advertisement or sponsored review used to exist has been marked with a placeholder. Note, although I feel the reviews of all sites have value, even sponsored sites, I have removed ALL the content for sponsored reviews as well (with a placeholder marking the former content). http://10w40.com/noads/default.asp The main content is on the following three pages: http://10w40.com/noads/pages/fix_diag.asp (109 reviews on 10 pages) http://10w40.com/noads/pages/fix_maint.asp (15 reviews on 2 pages) http://10w40.com/noads/pages/fix_repair.asp (78 reviews on 8 pages) There are also 3 pages with links to stores: http://10w40.com/noads/pages/buy_part.asp (40 reviews on 4 pages) http://10w40.com/noads/pages/buy_service.asp (9 reviews) http://10w40.com/noads/pages/buy_tool.asp (10 reviews) And finally, a good sized discussion area (hosted by everyone.net, so I can't make it appear without ads) http://10w40.community.everyone.net/commun_v3/scripts/directory.pl So there it is in all its naked glory. Why am I going to such great lengths? I don't need the extra traffic, the site has been around for quite a while and reaches enough people to make me feel that my invested time has been worth the effort. It's a principle thing. (Oh boy, not another idiot with a soapbox! <img src="/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" /> ) If the content of all these reviews has no value, then it seems likely that ODP should really review its policy on whether directory sites can be included at all, and advise editors to consider the new policy as they review their assigned areas in the future.
thehelper Posted October 18, 2002 Posted October 18, 2002 Re: www.10w40.com - No Advertising That is an awfully good way of showing your content - the naked glory. I wish sites really looked like that.
Guest Posted October 19, 2002 Posted October 19, 2002 Re: www.10w40.com - No Advertising ...no value... I never said that. I said the site seemed overwhelmed with affiliate-tagged stuff. I hope you realize I could have rejected without posting in this forum thread again, but I thought your content had merit and I wanted to give you a chance.
Guest tac2502 Posted October 19, 2002 Posted October 19, 2002 Re: www.10w40.com - No Advertising kctipton, Thanks for the reply. I consider the matter now closed - 10w40's directory-style content does not meet the ODP definition of significant, unique content. I'm not sure what this means for all the other directory-style sites that ODP has / will review in the future, but I consider the answer definitive for 10w40.com TAC
Meta hutcheson Posted October 19, 2002 Meta Posted October 19, 2002 Re: www.10w40.com - No Advertising >I'm not sure what this means for all the other directory-style sites that ODP has / will review in the future I think it's fair to assume: 1) As the ODP itself becomes a more comprehensive directory, it becomes harder and harder to create a "directory" site with content that is both useful and unique. The bar is rising. 2) The minimum directory site from 6 months ago would not get in today. The minimum directory site from 18 months ago will probably get removed next time it's looked at. 3) A forward-looking editor, when reviewing directory sites, will look for evidence of significant content in some form that the ODP couldn't match even by spidering its sites: basically, this means information that is valuable (to the SURFER, not the advertiser!) AND useful (to the SURFER, not the advertiser!) as well as being unavailable either in the the ODP directory or elsewhere on the web. 4) A forward-looking webmaster should prepare a site to be reviewed according to the ODP standards six months in the future (assuming a continued rise in standards), and should prominently feature the UNIQUE content of the site. I, personally, would not count on being able to get ANY directory site listed. Building a significant directory is (or at least so they say: I wouldn't know) a lot of work, and a lot of continued work. Reviewing one is almost as much work. You can submit one, but don't expect to get any sympathy from appeals to three-year-old listings. And don't whine about "fair". Equity has a temporal aspect. If you had submitted the site three years ago, it would have been evaluated like the others evaluated then.
Recommended Posts