Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
javascript is big with cheaters, actually.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
[QUOTE=gaydemon;26121]The thing is, I started to create these sites so that I would have better quality sites with better content for my surfers on gaydemon.
I have a lot of free and avs traffic that I give out to submitters but the submitters in many cases have really bad sites. [/QUOTE]
This “really bad sites” comment makes me quite curious. Can you go into more specific detail about what makes them bad?
I know I’ve seen a lot of clunky-looking heavily templated and predictable sites browsing the gay linklists. A lot of “oh, this guy again” reactions.
But you’ll see predictable sites in the straight linklists too.
I’m always interested in what linklist owners don’t like - it helps the creative juices flow when trying to dream up a new design.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
[QUOTE=gaydemon_jr;26144]But specifically not being able to use Google Analytics? And no use of XHTML?
I can certainly understand not using broken reciprocal links, but those are the two that seem strange.
Do you mean that the Javascript for google analytics might be interpreted as a script that potentially does those unsavoury things to visitors?[/QUOTE]
Well, this is how it works. They get/got so many dangerous submissions that they use a review script that looks for signs of scripts in the html. The review script will reject the site instantly as soon as it sees anything that MIGHT be a script. This is common in both the TGP and straight linklist environment - you can easily get permanently banned and blacklisted as a submitter by putting anything but very simple onmouseovers on urls in your page. (and many tgps of course don’t allow that)
A while back some counter companies started putting codes in the counters to “take” (steal) some of the traffic, or in other ways mess with the surfer. When this happened counters were banned. All counter codes are treated as potential bad guys.
The concern with xhtml is similar - with a dynamic page, the site submitter can turn on traffic stealing or ‘evil’ code (redirecting, toolbar installing, virus loading, etc) with a “flick of a switch”. Then after installing a few hundred malwares, or sending a few thousand surfers straight to the sponsor, shut off the installer and be all like “Me? I’m totally innocent, see, my page is clean”.
So, you can only safely use dynamic pages if you are a trusted submitter. A new submitter could of course create a dynamic page that looks like flat html at a cursory glance, but if they are discovered, it will be assumed that they intended to cheat.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
[QUOTE=gaydemon;26120]1. I mean the submission process, it would just have been easier to say submit 5 sites in one go, rather than going back Mon-Fri, submitting 1 site at a time. Its a waste of time having to go back each day.
- There was a few I saw yeasterday, I guess they follow the rules but certainly strecthing them. Most them dont have small links below banners, instead they have HUGE text around, above and below a banner, it counts as 1 link, but I would count it as 3.
[/QUOTE]
(1) Ahhh yes - the daily submission grind - groan. But thats the way it is - you have to submit every day. This is true in both the straight linklist and TGP environment. It becomes part of the routine.
(2) The larger text links around banners is an interesting effect - it’s considered one link, because there is only one href statement for the upper text, banner, and lower text. So, for a reviewing script, whose ‘job’ is to prescreen the page looking for hidden or excessive links, the banner with lots of text counts as one link.
Because it’s a very competitive environment, all subbers are looking for ways to increase their sales punch within the rules - and larger more agressive texts on banners are allowed, and work better than smaller text. So larger text became the standard.
Another influence was hosted freesites and hosted galleries from sponsors. Hosted galleries & freesites are made by designers using very agressive sales methods - so if you don’t build your own freesites and galleries with a matching agressiveness, you are letting the hosted stuff “cheat and outcompete” your work. So, again, to try for equity with the hosted stuff, bigger bolder ads have become the new standard - as ling as they follow the “one href per ad, three hrefs per page” rule.
I use larger agressive sales text above and below banners, and bigger banners and ads now as a matter of course.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
Jeez - you know what, I’m zoning - I’m confusing xhtml with shtml. My sleep schedule is all fucked up these days. I’m swinging my sleep schedule to go to some kind of dreaded family event this weekend - ordinarily I’m a vampire, asleep in the day, working all night.
My bad - sorry about that.
xhtml is fine. Just not the universal standard for freesites and tgps.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
Ah right, cool. I’m a fan of XHTML because you have more guidelines to work from. Stricter code means you can be more certain on how the page is displayed.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
just figured i would add something new to this topic of straight link lists…
I emailed the owner of a big straight list and asked why my sites where being rejected and must admit i was a bit puzzled by the answer as basically he told me that his reviewers didnt always approve sites that linked their recip link with no-name link lists…
Now beyound 1 or 2 sites that really disapoint in the traffic numbers they send i try and submit to some of the biggest and best ALL GAY link lists that i can find such as: gaydemon, gay porn pig, manpics etc so i wonder how these linklists can be considered no-name link lists …
:bang:
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
If you can tell me who it was, I can probably tell you what they were thinking.
There was a slightly sneaky submission trick a few years back - subbers would make a doorway to a freesite, and the recips would all be to hubs or fake linklists, with only one ‘real’ recip to a major linklist. Seeing this, many linklists started a new rule that said they had to see their names in a recip table with other big names, or the site would be rejected.
A straight linklist owner won’t recognize the gay linklist names unless he’s also a gay submitter himself. There’s a pretty long history of disconnect between the two linklist environments.
Some straight linklist owners ARE so uptight that when they fart only dogs can hear it - thats true enough.
But, from the straight linklist subbers perspective, the gay linklists are equally strange and intimidating.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
I think I’m starting to understand what the problem really is.
So a lot of the larger straight link lists depends on automatic approval scrips, that explains why the rules are so harsh and at times very odd. But they do make sense if you take a script into account.
It also accounts for why I think many sites accepted look bad, but of course a script would accept them since they follow the rules (but look messy / ugly).
Don’t get me wrong, most sites listed on gay link lists are just as bad if not worse. Its a real pain. For me I’ve never used a automatic approval script, we are 2 people actually checking each site and dont always go strictly by rules, if a site looks good its VERY likly to get listed even if it breaks some rules.
The quality is just as bad or worse though, which takes me back to whey i started these free sites… a need to get some good, higher quality and clean sites listed on my link lists.
Unlike straight link lists, there isnt a huge choice in sites submitted to us, so we are stuck with whats availabe.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
I think the problem is mainly that straight and gay link lists looks at different things.
Straight gets such large submissions they got to have strict rules that scripts can verify, gay link lists have much lower volumes and have time to consider each site but might look more at the content and design.
The thing I don’t like with gay free sites is that they use too much content. But thats because almost all gay link lists except mine have very high requirments for content, like 50+ pictures.
[quote=Bill;26286]
But, from the straight linklist subbers perspective, the gay linklists are equally strange and intimidating.[/quote]
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
[QUOTE=basschick;26074]i’m also happy to get their traffic - and there is a lot of it.
the secret is to read the rules before you create the site. then you won’t run into problems with a site you’ve already built.[/QUOTE]
Basschick is right. Straight link lists tend to send out more stable traffic over time. That is what i found anyways. Your site never seems to get buried.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
[QUOTE=gaydemon;26298]I think I’m starting to understand what the problem really is.
So a lot of the larger straight link lists depends on automatic approval scrips, that explains why the rules are so harsh and at times very odd. But they do make sense if you take a script into account.
It also accounts for why I think many sites accepted look bad, but of course a script would accept them since they follow the rules (but look messy / ugly).
[/QUOTE]
This is only partly correct. They “pre-screen” a site with a script before it hits the submitter and look for lings like # of href, javascript, opening in new windows etc. Then it does actually hit a reviewer.
You are having the same problems that I had years ago with straight link lists. My solution was to create totally different sites for each. My straight link list sites were loaded with banners and big text that I changed around to my hearts content. They looked horrible, but they got listed.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
I guess that might be the only solution. Create 2 totally different versions. One i like and one they accept.
[quote=abostonboy;26313]This is only partly correct. They “pre-screen” a site with a script before it hits the submitter and look for lings like # of href, javascript, opening in new windows etc. Then it does actually hit a reviewer.
You are having the same problems that I had years ago with straight link lists. My solution was to create totally different sites for each. My straight link list sites were loaded with banners and big text that I changed around to my hearts content. They looked horrible, but they got listed.[/quote]
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
So definitly no way to have Google Analytics, what about if I had only Analytcs script on the all pages except the warning / first page?
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
Do you really need their traffic?
This whole thread has been very educational.
It seems evident that the current business model these people employ leaves no room for variety in the product they provide their traffic.
I haven’t come across a link list in ages.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
well you can never have to much traffic or to many inbound links to a free site but i must admit you have to look at the time spend jumping through hoops compared to what they send traffic wise but unless you managed to get one approve there is no way to know if its worth the time and energy spent…
regarding the straight linklist owners not knowing the gay link lists thats probably true but again, if you run a straight site and have a gay category i simply refuse to believe you havnt seen gaydemon, manpics or gay porn pig before… i am still talking to him regarding it so will not “out” him just yet.
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
Hehe ok, the anwser i got regarding the no name linklists was intended for another webmaster and the problem has been cleared up so some of the straight linklists owners are people too that you can talk to apparently 
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
The real issue for me is that I have no idea what or how much traffic the straight links have (gay traffic), so dont know if its worth the amount of work it would take.
I have posted sample traffic for gay links lists just today here:
http://www.gaydemon.biz/showthread.php?t=4668
Would have been great to have a sample of traffic from straight lists as well!
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
agreed… after my talk i hope that my sites will now be accepted at least on the site this one guy runs and perhaps i can work my way up from there to have more straight lists that accept me…
Re: Submitting sites to straight link lists - Nightmare!
It seems most other larger straight link lists have no rules against Scripts (Google Analytics). So I’m going to try to other larger lists out instead.
I also noticed the link-o-rama has a lower alexa rank than gaydemon, so the traffic might not be that amazing then in the gay category.
So I think I’m going to try these out:
[SIZE=3]http://www.penisbot.com[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.smutgremlins.com[/SIZE][SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.hoes.com[/SIZE][SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.hqpornlinks.com[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.adult-list.com[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.tommys-bookmarks.com[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.wetplace.com[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]http://www.hqseek.com[/SIZE]