Certainly!
And no mirrors!

Otherwise it is senseless

Huh? |huh I don't need seperate ad campaigns to know which pages generate sales. Almost every sponsor I promote gives the referring URL when a sale is made. TCG shows I had 4 sales from index pages and one from a main page. No ad campaign needed:

http://www.best-wet-pussy.com/babe/fuck-and-squirt/ 1 0 0
http://www.best-wet-pussy.com/clean/squirting-teen/ 1 0 0
http://www.best-wet-pussy.com/babes/her-pussy-squirts/ 1 0 0
http://www.best-wet-pussy.com/clean/her-pussy-squirts/ 1 0 0
http://www.best-wet-pussy.com/babe/s...gasm/main.html 1 0 0

From checking a few months ago I know that about 90% of my sales come from the index page so naturally I don't want to lose it.

When sponsors let me set up ad campaigns I use that for my referral links on my link lists so I'll know that a sale came from the link list.

There's 36 recip links on there - you have just eliminated ONE page from the internet |bananna|

What happens if I have 72 Link Lists on my submit list? 2 mirrors instead of 4?

If I made 2 warning pages with 18 recips (very common) what makes you think that Google would even notice? Most of the page will look very different, as 18 recips take up a lot of space/coding on a page.

And why do you assume that Free Site builders are not smart enough to change around the coding on "mirror" pages so that the coding doesn't look exactly the same?

I can sit here all day & shoot down this idea.

Actually, that's not true. Many of those referrers are due to the surfer clicking through, possibly even accidentally, to the tour from the index of a free site and getting cookied and/or starting a tracking session. That doesn't mean they were sold. They probably returned instantly to your free site, enjoyed your galleries, and then clicked back to the tour to check it out more thoroughly.

Your server stats will also tell you that your index pages get a lot more traffic than any other page of a free site. That's because a lot of surfers hit a free site, say, "what the hell is this slop?" and go somewhere else. Reading stats and understanding what you are reading are two different things. It's far more complicated than what people like to think.

It is necessary to believe

To criticize always it is easy :)

My sponsors track which page the sale comes from so I know exactly which page the surfer signed up from. The ratio of 49% being index sounds about right to me and the main, gallery1 & gallery2 percentages posted above seem pretty accurate with our results as well.

I am always open to change, change is good, but of course I need to know how all my LL owners feel about this before making any such changes, their traffic is after all what is paying the bills.

I agree that LL rules make all our free sites look the same, we change the colours, style, content, etc. but with so many rules it's hard to keep things looking "new" and "original".

Sounds great to me. I'm sold. :D

All I'm saying is that the topic playing with the format is worthy of discussion. I don't agree with Kit's SEO assertions, but I'm also not certain that I'm fully comprehending it. I'm not an SEO. The idea of altering the free site has been put on the table a few times and you, my sexy green friend, have had quite a few ideas yourself. You just haven't gone public with them. If you do, please post them in English so that I can read them. ;)

Before we go any further, I think we need to hear from the French Link List & Free Site Coalition as well.

|virgohippy|

No, it's not. See, over here, we have this thing called Freedom Of Speech and while it's not a perfect system, we do have the right to question what we do not agree with & not just blindly follow what we are told is right.

I do have ideas & I really wish this sleep apnea thing didn't run (and ruin) my life for the last 12 months, otherwise I know I'd have brought them up for discussion.

Greenie!
To add a rule for free site 1.5
1. Minimum 40 other LLs
2. Free site (main page - index.html) created domain.com/free-site/index.html and gallery only gallery1.html (index1.html) and gallery2.html (index2.html) page.
Other pages In other folders - decline

In a result - 100% no MIRRORS :)

I read this after I posted my reply Useless, you know more about this than me for sure. I have always noticed how many sales I get from the index page but never thought more of it then the surfer signing up from the index page.

Knew I could count on you |greenguy| Kit - GG drama is the best |popcorn|

Threads like this sure get us thinking outside the box and generating some new ideas we may not have had otherwise.

Greenguy's traffic is exceptional, I have to follow more specific rules to get accepted at LOR but it is well worth it. :D

If you're after SEO, is 40+ outbound links on one page really better than 4 mirrors with fewer links per page?

While I agree this can happen I really don't think a surfer is going to leave all the goodies at the tour to return to my site just to see my pics, then go back and buy.

Well of course they get more traffic because that's the very first page they land on when they click a link at a link list. And yes, I'm sure many say "WTF is this crap?" and leave.

You quote my entire post, yet you answer none of the questions I asked |thumb

And I see another rabbit that Kit neglected to mention - 1st it was 30-50 recip links, now it's the ever popular myth that index.html is the best page name in the world! Maybe next Kit will "suggest" that all Free Sites should be based in the root of the domain |huh

That one sounds better to me, but what do I know. I've never been with linklist at #1 keyword porn.

Just guessing stuff here.. A recip table in google's eyes might look a bit artificial? Who in their right mind would naturally link to 12 or so site's and their respective category pages. Inside tables upon tables, and all on the one page.

Maybe something that would help free sites and link lists overall is to move away from using tables in general (they are meant for data, like DB tables, not for designing), stop with the category recips, use valid html and even though it's pointless with porn media, try for some accessibilty.

Not writing complete jibberish might help too:
http://www.nubiles-girls.com/f/naked-lala-princess/
"this baby never misses a chance to please her naughty mind and hungry body with a masturbation action"

What's the point of it all if this is the end product?

I just re-read some of the "sales text" as well - nothing like describing popping a cherry in detail :D

I recommend you a site which specializes on photo and video materials of real virgins. They find them and photograph them hymens close up, record on video the defloration actions after which defloration blood is visible.

Since I love numbers, I'll throw some in to the discussion :)

I pulled some stats for 2006 and 2008, just to display the difference in CTR. Numbers are from the same domain (amateur niche) and between January 1 and March 28.

Average CTR for 2008:
index: 1.8%
main: 7.6%
gallery 1: 7.9%
gallery 2: 8.8%

Average CTR for 2006:
index: 4.6%
main: 1.9%
gallery 1: 5.2%
gallery 2: 3.0%

I do that with about 3/4 of the sites I review. :D

As far the 30-40 recips and no mirrors concept goes, I'm not sure I like that. If we do that, we may as well start listing blogs. Oh yeah, we already do that. :D

I like the idea of having the gallery navigation on the index. I really do. And I'm beginning to better understand the no mirror/SEO thing. Of course, I only ever submit to 12-15 lists with no mirrors anyway, so that wouldn't help my 10 free sites per year.

I plan on building a few more sites in a few weeks and I wouldn't mind seeing some changes before I start building.

First time I only got to UW's post. But now I read the whole thing.

Instead of posting stats, I should have brought beer and peanuts!

I think I am going to try and make a sample freesite v2.01 sometime this weekend :D I make sure to ask "Who would list this site" for a good |catfight|

The example links to 36 Link Lists in the "recip" area. Is there a term for someone who tries to prove a point with incorrect examples?

****

So, now that I have taken a nice 2 hour nap & thought things over, let me sum everything up for Kit to comment on when he returns:
1 - Nothing Kit posted makes sense or changes anything that is always in place, except the removal of the warning page (which is called "a good faith effort" by ASACP)
2 - The hidden aspects of this - as alluded to by Sergeyka - are Free Sites where the 1st page is named index.html & has 40+ recip links on the left hand side of the main table.

Did I miss anything?

Oops! How come it's Free Sites 1.5, but Link List 2, which was a Free Site version of TGP2, failed miserably 7 years ago? |huh|crazy||badidea|

Greenie, you should star in Chainsaw Massacre 3.0 ;)

GG speaks for me on this one...

Free sites primary use is NOT SEO .. and if you think they are.. you need to go do some reading.....


As has been said.. Nothing has changed, the same static pages, in the same order, still not updated..


Oh wait.. one thing may have changed...

If you submit this type of site to PenisBot etc.. It would move THIER recips further "up" your page, making them one of the first things an SE robot will find and making "THEM" more important.. than the rest of your page...

So.... after having destroyed you page with BS spammy keyword recips, you would make the first links "off" the page the most important things...

Here is an easier way.... Find a gun, aim it at your foot, and pull the trigger...



DD

I'd try to clarify a pair of moments. Shortcomings that Kit pointed to, are realy far from this format, just because it is just test. Nobody can formulate the rules and say, "YEH, THEY ARE COOL, AND WILL WORK!", so this discussion has the main aim to make your brain to work on the problem of LL slow death. I'm sure that many FS posters has there own experience and observations about SEO and usability of FS, everyone has something to say, like "I have a suggestion, I wanted this feature on FS for 7+ years, but rules fuck my creativity!". But in this discussion practically nobody said so, on russian board there was a great discussion, and the result you see is united thoughts of differen webmasters.
About text. Owners want unique texts on each FS. The easy way is to write the text from FS in quotes in google. If Google says "NO" that is cool, the text is unique and 99% that after a week of listing google will give you ONLY ONE result by the same text, and this will be FS , that submitter posted. You see? This time, LL really gets a link from UNICQUE SITE! +50 links from PR3+ LLs and we have PR2+ UNIQUE FS, link from whish will be minimum 2-3 times better for LL! But it is, IMHO, not only mine.
Then about links, it really seems strange to do them as a blogroll, but it works on blogs, it works on other sites, it is more readable to serfer, than a table of unknown banners or links.
About %s from different pages, whi dont you think that it will be 90%-index/main, and 5 and 5 - galleries? It is necessary to try and then to talk about. This business consists of experiments, suggestions and blether. People who want to experiment - experiment while you are talking shit, and won't tell you about results it it works.
To Greenie, you told you don't know google alhoritms. NOBODY KNOWS ! All SEO is about realisation of observation of SE reactions to this or that changes in site structure and so on. Kit and Co has a GREAT experience and lots of observations, and when he says that it will be better it is not just a thoughts, I think that he is "daddy" in seo and I respect him about this, the same way I respect you as a "LL daddy". So it is your choice what to do with new format, but I think you soon suggest something new, too. Ewerything changes and biz too, we have to adjust to it, so this topic is normal reaction to biz changes. Nothing more to say for now.

^^ Can someone please translate what he said?

Personally when I build a free site I don't give a rat's ass for SEO, though sometimes I get it.
What interests me the most in this discussion is finding ways to make FS's more interesting, and hopefully more profitable.
I don't build many free sites anymore, because my time makes me more money building galleries and AVS sites, but I used to do very well with different looking free sites, before the standard format became the only way to build.
I like what Persian Kitty lists, very few rules.

The point I understood him to make is that if you do multiple mirrors, only one of the mirrors gets indexed by G because they are duplicate content, so if a site is listed on your linklist, and it is one of the mirrors that does not get indexed, you're screwed from a SEO standpoint. BUT, if you have one site with 50 links on it, you have a unique site and all 50 list get benefit from Googles indexing. And since it's not uncommon for blogs to have 50+ recips, why not freesites?

I'm not saying I agree because I know shit about this stuff, and Greenie has already shot most of it down...but that's just my understanding of what he is saying. |huh

Greenie mentioned a few post up that people can and do change the code and/or text on each mirror (I haven't been doing this, but I will start) then each mirror can get indexed. This does seem to have an advantage in that 2,3,4, or more sites get indexed instead of just one.

Also, Greenie mentioned that the end result is that the list owner gets benefit rather than the freesite builder.


At any rate, interesting thread. I am for anything that would help freesites convert better.

Hello - exactly! (That's a line from Boogie Nights, btw.) It's worth pondering, at least, for those who still have the ability to think for themselves.

I'm always amazed at how resistant the old guard is to change unless, of course, it was their own idea or their new rule. I could easily shoot down many, if not all, of the contrary points put forth in this thread, but I'm not here to argue with friends. I do suggest that people give a new format some thought. The strangest fact of this whole new idea is that it's being proposed by the owner of a link list who isn't having any traffic problems at all.

UW, we aren't resistant to change.. but change for changes sake has never helped anyone....

It is my belief that this new "structure" ISN'T NEW..! As far as I know there is no rule that says you CAN'T link the galleries off the index page.. in fact I know people that do and have done my self...

.. and you can have recips on your 'main' page for many established LL's....

So what is new? Nothing?

Except as I said before..... recips are closer to the top of the page...

DD

Free sites are designed as they are now to whip up the surfer into a frenzy hopefully.

The index page is to wet their tastes and give em a good idea of what the site is.

Once the surfer hits the main page he has a chubby and we hope the banners really start to look good.

Now the gallerys, his hand should be on his cock and and other getting ready for a credit card.

You need to get em warmed up and pumped up. This 1.5 crap is gunna turn surfers off straight away cause they are faced with a barrage of spammy blind link style recips that certain ppl love these days.

Borgivan,
Maybe I missed something in the translation on your last post. Are you trying to compare a blog to a free site? The two have nothing in common other than they are pages published on the web.

I have not seen one thing mentioned in this thread that would accomplish what Kit was talking about in his original post.

I think most of us are open to change (as Danger Dave has stated). If you are going to change something make it a positive change. I would like nothing more than to use flash videos (instead of mpg) on html pages with a brief description of the clip and maybe what the full length movie is about along with a link to the sponsor and a link back to the index of my free site. It is doubtful I will ever see that day as people have abused luxuries like that in the past. :(

The person whom I think does the most SEO on his free sites does that very thing and it never fails to impress me. It had never occurred to me to do that, or even that I could.

I'm not really sure as to why I've been so slow to understand what the actual SEO purpose was of this "new" format. (It's probably been clearly stated, but I've been mostly skimming the thread and reacting to little bits.) Anyway, the point, I suppose, it to eliminate mirroring. That way, each link list is directly linked to (and from) the page which Google is indexing and giving juice to, instead of the current manner which is pretty much a lottery. Right now, link lists sort of luck in to being on the mirror which Google mysteriously decides is the one to behold.

Like I've said, when I build free sites, I don't mirror. I build a single copy and submit to my select group of lists. So the new format wouldn't benefit me much as a submitter, other than giving me good reason to submit to more places, but I am beginning to see the bigger picture here. I realize that free sites are no great SEO tool. But I am wondering if they could gain some SE love if they were altered in a similar manner as to what's being suggested. Also, even if the new format proved to be only good for link lists themselves, wouldn't that by default be good for the submitters?

Another point - what if the only the index was changed per kit's suggestion, but the main page was left intact? Anyone have feelings on how that would impact lists and free site builders? My idea would be to place the warning and ad blocks on the left side of the page and place a thin column of recip links in blog roll style down the right site. At least that would eliminate mirroring and dupe content. Though honestly, I'm not sure how much you can do for pages that often 2 or 3 directories deep.

This is the part I like. I submit to around 40 lists so this would allow me to make one entrance and no mirrors. I see no difference in 40 single recip links or 20 dual recip links. Seems like more incoming links for the same amount of outgoing links would be better.

I also do not want to be told where I should put these links, like what has been suggested. If I want to put it on top, left, right, middle or on the bottom (before enter links) it should be allowed. Plus you need to keep single links to the link list title name only (not spammy concoctions), so the size of it all is about the same and hopefully not to overwhelming.

At this time most of my sales do come from the index/warning page, but I seriously contribute this to being the first point of contact to sell the surfer and nothing more. Because of this it does not matter to me if its a 3 or 4 page freesite. I even like the idea of a 2 page freesite. Index/Warning page leads into one big (20 to 40 pic) gallery page. Maybe on the gallery page submitter would be allowed 5 or 6 outgoing links to compensate. I keep my number one page for sales and the surfer has easier access to content for more bookmarks. Just a thought.

Yeah that would be something. What kind of abuse is possible with action script? If it's pop ups and stuff, you can already do that with a wmv.

I didn't know you could do that with a wmv. But I don't really spend much time trying to fuck over a future customer.
I didn't really have anything in particular in mind with the abuse. I leave it up to the bathroom gangs around the globe to come up with things like that. :D

Goodluck trying to change the established model. As far as I can see, all of the points you mentioned Kit are not validated. I also agree that the purpose of the normal freesite is not intended to be SE friendly as GG and DD stated. Maybe 3-4 years ago, but certainly not today...

Lets just scrap the entire free porn model all together and then we'll really make out? |jester|

From a design point of view, I'd love to see some change allowed in the way I build freesites. After a few hundred, even the most original designs look like overused templates.
Change is welcome as long as we make sure the changes benefit everyone involved as much as possible. I'm not convinced that this new idea does that.

A few questions:

1. What happens to all of those smaller/newer link lists out there that don't make the 40-50 limit? Do we just drop them and the good relationships we've built up?
I'm not happy to do that, sorry.

2. How would a link list owner know if mirrors are created?

3. Can anyone coax Greenguy into sharing his new ideas so we can bounce them around a bit?
:D

I was considering the referring page - sales thing a few days ago when comparing the use of sponsor content to bought content.
From what I could see, using sponsor content on a freesite gets me more sales, although the index page does show as the referring url. That leads me to think that the surfer takes a look at the sponsor straight away, from the first page of my freesite, then returns to my freesite to check out my free samples, and then heads back to the sponsor from a gallery to join if he likes what he sees.
That's what it looks like, but I could be wrong.
|huh

As I have said in a few other threads I would love to use flash movies too. Less porn given away (unless the surfer is reasonably tech savy and knows how to grab them) plus more bookmarkers which I think with toolbars ‘sharing’ information on the surfers habits can only been seen as a big vote for that page.

There are possible problems with cheaters but why not for trusted submitters?

I think the idea of updating free sites interesting as from the moment anyone starts building them one of the first things said is just build and forget.

If I came up with this idea I'd expect to be bashed around a bit as well. Hell, if anyone knows about taking a bashing because of new rule changes, it's me :D But like DDave said, this seems to be change for the sake of changing & that's never good.

What would these 1.5 sites do in reality?
1 - eliminate the warning page - something that Free Sites & Link Lists were BUILT on. Way back in time, sites like mine & al4a linked to the same type of sites/pages. Somewhere in there, sites like al4a started to link right to the gallery pages & sites like mine started to link to warning pages only. I am NOT saying that I invented any of this, but somewhere in there, TGP & Link Lists were created. The warning page is a massive portion of the Link List & Free Site foundation.
2 - adding more recips - can anyone tell me the rule of thumb for the number of recip links you can put on a warning page? Anyone? Bueller? Frye? The answer is: no one knows :) We've all seen warning pages with 6 recips that look like Gov Patterson placed them on the page & we've all seen sites with 20-30 recips that looked just lovely. Do I think that the rule of thumb should be 40+ recips? No. But for fuck sakes, the left hand cell (ie: the 1st coding the SE spider reads) should not be filled with 40+ blind links!

Soon :)

***

Kit? Comment?

Absolutely right.

For those who use CSS for laying out pages but may not know how to do this, here's a short article about how to make sure your content is always first in the page source code that the SE spiders read--regardless of the design of the site--followed by things like navigation, banners, recips, etc.

Hope that doesn't ruin anyone's plans.

:)