New free site format (version 1.5)

bluebrit · 2008-03-28, 07:25 AM

Personally speaking I have always included the ICRA header to every FS I have built, so that's nothing new to me. In fact I assumed most people did this as a matter of course and my sales appear to be on par with everyone else’s.

Using Google as an example. They appear to penalize a FS because of its lack of updating. That and the obvious keywords, similar free content, and the once it’s built its forgotten marketing strategy used by everybody.

This more than anything appears to me, to be the main reason for lowered sales by any FS built and as a kick on, lowered sales to LL owners because of these static sites.

Because of this I doubt the proposed design will alter that much, although it will help while search engines try to catch up with what were doing differently. Once they understand the new format I think we will be back to square one again.

As a suggestion, it may that two or three agreed upon FS formats should be used so that there is a greater difference in design. That at least would slow down se’s from taking them out of their main listings so quickly.

Another suggestion would be to grant the ability to trusted webmasters by LL owners, the right to update the galleries and text on a FS, which would help to keeping them listed on major search engines due to the constantly changing content. Updating FS pages should also improve the LL page listings as well.

Once a change has been made the FS should be flagged by the submitter so that the changes can be checked by the LL owner. As a trusted submitter, this could be done by using a special email address.

2008-03-28, 07:25 AM	#11
bluebrit Along for the ride and loving it. Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,873	Personally speaking I have always included the ICRA header to every FS I have built, so that's nothing new to me. In fact I assumed most people did this as a matter of course and my sales appear to be on par with everyone else’s. Using Google as an example. They appear to penalize a FS because of its lack of updating. That and the obvious keywords, similar free content, and the once it’s built its forgotten marketing strategy used by everybody. This more than anything appears to me, to be the main reason for lowered sales by any FS built and as a kick on, lowered sales to LL owners because of these static sites. Because of this I doubt the proposed design will alter that much, although it will help while search engines try to catch up with what were doing differently. Once they understand the new format I think we will be back to square one again. As a suggestion, it may that two or three agreed upon FS formats should be used so that there is a greater difference in design. That at least would slow down se’s from taking them out of their main listings so quickly. Another suggestion would be to grant the ability to trusted webmasters by LL owners, the right to update the galleries and text on a FS, which would help to keeping them listed on major search engines due to the constantly changing content. Updating FS pages should also improve the LL page listings as well. Once a change has been made the FS should be flagged by the submitter so that the changes can be checked by the LL owner. As a trusted submitter, this could be done by using a special email address.