Submitting question

[Halfdeck]

Index.html or SE suicide? Lol you must be kidding. I only use index.html for the domain root and I'll keep it that way.

I'll have to agree with Useless on the dangling links. Besides, there are no dangling links on a free site, not that I care. Anyway, no matter what you name your warning page, unless you do something seriously wrong, it's going to end up with a PR 2-3+ in a month or two. LLs with recips on that page will get a slice of that PR (as long as the site doesn't get delisted). Filenames are IRRELEVANT to the SEs unless you're bottom fishing 1,000 result keywords or you're optimizing for Google Images.

PR matters when you're trying to get a site fully indexed in Google. If you have a 100 page LL, you could have it all indexed with PR 0 (or maybe not). If you want to lay your LL out like DD or Jays XXX, you're not gonna pull it off with a PR 2.

PR for sake of higher ranking is so fucking 2001 (or whenever).

[nomercy]

I was about to ask a similar question. Thanks for the info.

I still have a question though about the way I'm naming the folders... I was thinking about structuring my freesites like this:

http://domain.com/freesite_name/enter/
http://domain.com/freesite_name/Entrance/
http://domain.com/freesite_name/EnterHere/
http://domain.com/freesite_name/Warning/

and so on... with the index.html and correct recips in each of those folders. Would that be acceptable or would most Link Lists owners want the folder that their recip resides in to have a meaningful keyword, as opposed or 'enter' or 'warning', etc, appended to the main freesites/keyword folder?

I didn't think that would matter because the URL itself and the index page would have plenty of relevant keywords, just the immediate folder name wouldn't be relevant.

e.g. http://bikerbabesonharleys.com/double_bubble_beach_blond_biker_babes/Warning/

Anyway, either way is fine. I just wanted to ask before I submitted any in that format.

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by nomercy

I was about to ask a similar question. Thanks for the info.

I still have a question though about the way I'm naming the folders... I was thinking about structuring my freesites like this:

http://domain.com/freesite_name/enter/
http://domain.com/freesite_name/Entrance/
http://domain.com/freesite_name/EnterHere/
http://domain.com/freesite_name/Warning/

and so on... with the index.html and correct recips in each of those folders. Would that be acceptable or would most Link Lists owners want the folder that their recip resides in to have a meaningful keyword, as opposed or 'enter' or 'warning', etc, appended to the main freesites/keyword folder?

I didn't think that would matter because the URL itself and the index page would have plenty of relevant keywords, just the immediate folder name wouldn't be relevant.

e.g. http://bikerbabesonharleys.com/doubl...babes/Warning/

Anyway, either way is fine. I just wanted to ask before I submitted any in that format.

To some extent, it becomes a matter of preference. Everyone develops what works best for them and still complies with the rules. Using your example, looks like you should be able to keep track of your sites pretty well that way. And I highly doubt any reviewer would decline your sites using that structure.

I track free sites with a spreadsheet containing all relevant data to the site...url, content used, paysite affiliate link code...blah blah blah. Doing so enables being able to use a different keyterm for each 'mirror'. ex..

buymyporn.com/hornyblondes/
buymyporn.com/hotsexyblondes/
buymyporn.com/blondesluts/

For each site...the keyterms on the pages are altered to match up with the folder. 16 recips per site/3 sites/48 link lists...all using the same set of content. This process does take longer than simply duplicating the sites across different folders. But, it isn't too bad once you get used to it

[nomercy]

Thanks for sharing that. I was thinking sort of along those lines as well, but thought I was being too anal and obsessing about too many details. I do see the benefits to doing it that way though.

I write PHP/MySQL, Unix shell scripts to organize things sometimes, but I'm trying to break the habit of spending too much time on the writing 'duct tape' type tools rather than actually using them for the purposes I intended. But a simple spreadsheet seems like it would help out a lot without getting sucked into a bunch of coding to catalog URLs, content, etc. I just might try that. Thanks.

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by nomercy

Thanks for sharing that. I was thinking sort of along those lines as well, but thought I was being too anal and obsessing about too many details. I do see the benefits to doing it that way though.

I write PHP/MySQL, Unix shell scripts to organize things sometimes, but I'm trying to break the habit of spending too much time on the writing 'duct tape' type tools rather than actually using them for the purposes I intended. But a simple spreadsheet seems like it would help out a lot without getting sucked into a bunch of coding to catalog URLs, content, etc. I just might try that. Thanks.

Yea...it IS very easy in this biz to get caught up in the little things. Try to use the KISS principle whenever possible

Spreadsheets are a great tool...very easy to set up and convenient as hell. But then, I come from an accounting background...so I'm sorta used to spreadsheets

I've got car maintenance set up...lawn tractor...motorcycle...all on spreadsheets

[Halfdeck]

buymyporn.com/hornyblondes/
buymyporn.com/hotsexyblondes/
buymyporn.com/blondesluts/

If you're optimizing foldernames using keywords, use dashes, period or + between words. Google doesn't parse words in URLS. For example,

buymyporn.com/horny-blondes/
buymyporn.com/hot-sexy-blondes/
buymyporn.com/blonde-sluts/

buymyporn.com/hotsexyblondes/ will only get a boost when someone runs a search for "hotsexyblondes." Same deal with underscores.

buymyporn.com/horny_blondes/ is only optimized for "horny_blondes"

I would keep urls all in lowercase.

[MeatPounder]

Originally Posted by Halfdeck

Google doesn't parse words in URLS.



buymyporn.com/hotsexyblondes/ will only get a boost when someone runs a search for "hotsexyblondes." Same deal with underscores.

I have heard that over and over
but then I look at the google search results and see the keywords run together in the urls boldedsuch as your example hot sexy blondes (no quotes)
http://www.google.com/search?q=hot+s...&start=10&sa=N
returns these examples with the keywords bolded by google
www.sex-and-porn.com/hotblondes.php
www.blackgirls.ws/sexyblondes.html
www.pheaton.com/hotbabes.htm

[Halfdeck]

Meatpounder, highlighting doesn't mean parsing.

You can read John Scott's take on it, or run a few searches on pages of your own domain where keywords only appear in your URL and nowhere else on the page.

Say you have a page named /blow-jobs/freakygothicbiatchessex.html. You never mention the word "freaky" or "sex" on the page text or have any links pointing to the page with those words in their anchor text. Now, run these searches: "site:domain.com/blow-jobs/ freaky" and ""site:domain.com/blow-jobs/ sex". Assuming that's the only page you have under /blow-jobs/, Google will return 0 results in both cases.

Here's Vanessa Fox's take on underscores, and you can see the same reasoning behind spaces and why Google doesn't parse them:

And speaking of putting a dash in URLs, hyphens are often better than underscores. african-elephants.html is seen as two words: “African” and “elephants”. african_elephants is seen as one word: african_elephant. It’s doubtful many people will be searching for that.

Notice we also see keywords separated by underscores highlighted in Google SERPs.