A Discussion On Blind Links

[ponygirl]

Talleyrand, I don't think anyone is going to explain this to you but I have some time to kill

The name of the paysite does NOT have to be in the link to make it 'un'-blind. There are lots of ways to make a text link that isn't blind. IF the surfer would know he's leaving the site he's on, IF the surfer understands he's possibly going to be asked for a cc, IF the surfer knows what he's getting into before he clicks that link, then it's not blind.

the problem is that lately, so many submits have been crossing that line so completely that it deserved a discussion.

my 2 pennies, anyway

goin to cook dinner now.....

Ponygirl

[Yahook]

I think webmasters have to be in the middle of this:
"This is link to paysite. You have to pay for porn there "
and
"Click here to see the next gallery of this girl"

[Talleyrand]

DEAR PONYGIRL:

Thank you for your quickly answer.
I knew what you told me because I read completely the thread.
I believed that my post was clear about the idea, and the example was only that: an example.
I think that the blind link point must to have some explicit rule about it because it is not enough to writte: "Not blind links accepted". But it is only my idea. May be is better go on with the old rule that webmasters did not understand well.

Best regards,

TALLEYRAND

Originally Posted by ponygirl

Talleyrand, I don't think anyone is going to explain this to you but I have some time to kill

The name of the paysite does NOT have to be in the link to make it 'un'-blind. There are lots of ways to make a text link that isn't blind. IF the surfer would know he's leaving the site he's on, IF the surfer understands he's possibly going to be asked for a cc, IF the surfer knows what he's getting into before he clicks that link, then it's not blind.

the problem is that lately, so many submits have been crossing that line so completely that it deserved a discussion.

my 2 pennies, anyway

goin to cook dinner now.....

Ponygirl

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by Yahook

I think webmasters have to be in the middle of this:
"This is link to paysite. You have to pay for porn there "
and
"Click here to see the next gallery of this girl"

heheh...that's actually not bad

[Yahook]

I agree with you Talleyrand, linklist owners must do this. But from the other side - do you think it's possible to give universal instuction? If so - then let's make it here and use on every linklist.

[Lemmy]

How difficult is it to to understand the concept of not trying to trick the surfer into clicking on a link?

If you're unsure whether or not a link is blind, it most likely IS blind in the eyes of many reviewers.

[Talleyrand]

DEAR YAHOOK:

I think that the best rule must to born of link list owners posting about it. But for it is necessary that they want to do it...
Best regards,

TALLEYRAND

Originally Posted by Yahook

I agree with you Talleyrand, linklist owners must do this. But from the other side - do you think it's possible to give universal instuction? If so - then let's make it here and use on every linklist.

[Yahook]

How difficult is it to to understand the concept of not trying to trick the surfer into clicking on a link?

I'm sure many webmasters agree with this concept, but how can you check if they trick surfer?

[Talleyrand]

DEAR LEMMY:

If blind links are some so easy, why the link list owners have each one its own opinion about it?
When link list owners reject free sites for blind link, they says that they try to think like a surfer that will see the link. Why not to think like a webmaster about blind links? Is so difficult?

Best regards,

TALLEYRAND

Originally Posted by Lemmy

How difficult is it to to understand the concept of not trying to trick the surfer into clicking on a link?

If you're unsure whether or not a link is blind, it most likely IS blind in the eyes of many reviewers.

[Preacher]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

How difficult is it to to understand the concept of not trying to trick the surfer into clicking on a link?

Apparently, that depends on the webmasters native language.

I'm not taking shots here on the ESL guys, but after reading some of these site descriptions -- and I know Lemmy gets some of the same ones I do -- it becomes obvious that they don't have a firm grasp of how to create a properly formed sentence.

I would imagine that would make it a bit more difficult to understand what might be considered "blind" and what would not. I couldn't even imagine trying to build a site in a foreign language.

That does not make it acceptable mind you, just a possible reason for some of the confusion.

[Yahook]

I agree that it depends of the webmaster native language. But it also depends of the lots of other factors. So it woud be great if someone gives here universal instuction how to write descriptions for paysites. It will be very usefull for submitters.

[Lemmy]

Originally Posted by Talleyrand

If blind links are some so easy, why the link list owners have each one its own opinion about it?

Don't confuse varied opinions with disagreement on the concept, it's just (for the most part) a difference in where they draw the line.

If you want your sites to be universally accepted make your links universally unambiguous. If you still get rejected for blind links you didn't try hard enough.

Originally Posted by Yahook

I'm sure many webmasters agree with this concept, but how can you check if they trick surfer?

Put yourself in the shoes of a reasonable surfer (as opposed to a quarrelsome webmaster) and click the link. If you're surprised at where you end up, you've been tricked.

[Talleyrand]

DEAR SIR:

It is a pity that the webmasters must to wait that some Big Boy will write clear rules about blind link. Then, other will run to copy the new rules to their link list.

Best regards,

TALLEYRAND

Originally Posted by Lemmy

Don't confuse varied opinions with disagreement on the concept, it's just (for the most part) a difference in where they draw the line.

If you want your sites to be universally accepted make your links universally unambiguous. If you still get rejected for blind links you didn't try hard enough.


Put yourself in the shoes of a reasonable surfer (as opposed to a quarrelsome webmaster) and click the link. If you're surprised at where you end up, you've been tricked.

[Surfn]

The puppets following the puppet masters |dancinggu

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by Talleyrand

DEAR SIR:

It is a pity that the webmasters must to wait that some Big Boy will write clear rules about blind link. Then, other will run to copy the new rules to their link list.

Best regards,

TALLEYRAND

ok now, really that's not getting you anywhere. The 'big boys' see hundreds more submissions per day than I do. They see the same crap cheaters day in and day out, in what I'm sure is very frustrating volume. Who do you think should make the rules?? And if they make a new rule I know it's (usually heheh) for a very good reason. Now why shouldn't I adopt that rule at my 'little LL' if I think it will weed out the crap before it begins?

Ponygirl

[Lemmy]

Talleyrand, it doesn't get much clearer than this: Make it obvious to the surfer that the link will take them away from your site and somewhere else and you will never get rejected for blind links.

[Halfdeck]

There's no one set standard for blind links. There's been plenty of reviewers/LL owners asking "What do you guys think, is this blind?" There's a degree of blindness in any link; some are REALLY blind and others are blind just to a select few.

Asking LL owner to clearly define what's blind is like asking someone to describe the color red, or DoJ to define obscenity. "I'll know when I see it."

All you need to do is understand the purpose behind good links - which is signify the destination URL and say what your surfer will find once he gets there.

You don't need a handbook to drive a car, and you don't need one to build free sites.

[Surfn]

This appears to be another long ass thread about nothing

[MadMax]

Originally Posted by Talleyrand

It is a pity that the webmasters must to wait that some Big Boy will write clear rules about blind link. Then, other will run to copy the new rules to their link list.

I'll say this loudly enough that the whole of Eastern Europe and Western Asia can hear me:

THAT IS WHY I STARTED THIS THREAD. I THOUGHT IT WAS HIGH TIME TO GET AS MANY LINK LIST OWNERS AS POSSIBLE TOGETHER AND TALK ABOUT BLIND LINKS, SO THAT THE SUBMITTERS WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE A BUNCH OF OPINIONS AT ONCE.

AS IT TURNS OUT, EVERYONE WEST OF GERMANY SEEMS TO HAVE ABOUT THE SAME OPINION OF WHAT IS AND IS NOT A BLIND LINK.

NOW THAT THIS THREAD IS HERE, WHEN SOMEONE ASKS ABOUT BLIND LINKS LOTS OF US JUST POINT THEM TO THIS THREAD AND GO ABOUT OUR BUSINESS

WHY WOULD YOU BOTHER SAYING THAT "SOMEONE SHOULD GET TOGETHER A UNIVERSAL SET OF RULES ON WHAT IS AND IS NOT A BLIND LINK"
IN A FUCKING THREAD THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR???

[DangerDave]

MM... I heard that message all the way down here...

DD

[plateman]

WOW that was neat.... life go on with or without blind link

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by DangerDave

MM... I heard that message all the way down here...

DD

Yup, heard it loud and clear here too Dave

These guys are un-freakin-believable

Talley, Yahook...OTHERS who apparently are still unsure of blind links...here's a great thread on the subject.

http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=23441

IF you actually read AND comprehend it...your apparent haze on the subject should be come clear

[natalie]

Hmm I have this funny feeling that it still won't sink in. Why is that I wonder?

[Surfn]

MrYum

You are giving them more intellectual credit than they deserve |shocking|

[MadMax]

Originally Posted by DangerDave

MM... I heard that message all the way down here...

DD

Sweet, my still works

I think I'm going to start making my posts a bit less complicated so everyone can understand.