Most people that build freesites also build galleries...they use two galleries they submit to tgps to build a freesite. To get listed on most tgps you should go with around 15 pics per gallery (some allow less, but almost none allow under 12 pics unless you manage to find an old ghost town TGP2 site that someone forgot to shutdown).

Many people are already building freesites with more content then GG is requiring now. So, I'm not actually sure why this 20% thing is such a big thing for you.

in case my question went unnoticed -

what point stand behind +4 pictures rule?

I see this: attract bookmarkers from other link-lists offering them more free porn than other lists who haven't yet got this rule?
but that's how tgp started it's destruction awhile ago, why follow this? everybody is making money now, why change anything? don't get the point.

(talking as free site submitter)

somebody mentioned in the thread before, better quality content = more sales for free site submitter. free site strategy has nothing to do with content at all and fact you are making most of your sales from index / main pages just proves it... content is to fill up link-list you're submitting to, that's why you want to use less amount of pictures allowed.

personally, going to stop submitting to every link-list from my database who copy this rule. for free sites submitters, it's not about traffic you receive from this or that link-list after all > it's about link-backs to get your free site indexed in SearchEngines in the end of the day. some forget this or haven't realised.

Yeah I've been doing this for years. Using 15 pics also allows me to be more creative with ad layout.

For what it's worth I've updated my LL rules as well. :)

Leave it to some porn slingin |potleaf|webmasters to overcomplicate and over think, a few uncomplicated simple rules. "Y'all er killin me"

PS. I know, I'm a "Fargin Icehole" :D

That statement is so off base, it's funny. 1st off, you're assuming that surfers know what the rules are from link list to link list (I'm not even going to start up the old debate that surfers know if they are on a TGP or a LL, because they don't) Surfers don't bookmark a LL because they see 24 pics & not bookmark a LL because they see 20 - they bookmark sites that the like.

The 2nd part is that you're even implying that I want to attract (dare I say, steal) bookmarkers from other LL's. That's really strange, since my main page has 40 or so links to other lists & my category pages have countless links to others as well. I'm not in a competition with any other link lists - I send traffic to Cleo, she send traffic to me. I send traffic to Linkster, he sends traffic to me. We all pretty much share our traffic with each other.

If that's the case, then what do you care if you have 20, 24, 30, 60, 1000 pics on your gallery pages.

I've never begged for submissions & I rarely kiss the submitters ass - especially when they think their site is my content. I send out a lot traffic on a daily basis & I have to have some rule in place as far as what I list. Don't like the rules, don't submit.

That really is a Catch 22 - most of the big traffic sending Link Lists are the ones that have the most SE "power" (for lack of a better word) So by not submitting to the big link lists, your chances of getting decent (if any) SE listings is very slim.

Let me just go on record as saying..i'm am so totally blown away by the number of people freaking out over 4 more pictures.. and a little extra cheap ass bandwidth..

Change, like surfer's dicks, is hard. :D

Holy Shit! A statement like that makes me WANT to adopt GG's new rules. Goddamn - if it would keep IGNORANT INBRED COCKSUCKERS LIKE YOU from ever submitting to me, it may be very well worth it.

Who the fuck do you think feels threatened by that? Do you think there are link list owners sitting at home wetting their panties because a few free site submitters don't like a couple of rules. WAKE THE FUCK UP! Free site submitters have never like the rules.

Christ, I hate Comic Sans, but you don't see me threatening to boycott LOR's FREE FUCKING TRAFFIC.

As is said, from your lips to God's ear.

Wait...

Yeah, that was pornographic and blasphemous at the same time.

Damn.

|buddy|

I think I know why Sexvilly is so upset with Link Lists
Honestly, I'm waiting to hear back form the webmaster that you copied the ads from before I remove you.

Something that has not been covered in this (exhaustive) thread:

Very few sponsors offer downloadable content due either to 2275 issues, or licence controls. Many of the ones that do, seem to offer tiny 640x40- either screen caps, or with the idea that they are making life easier for submitters.

Personally, I am hoping that these changes reflect positively on smaller programs (such as ours :D ) who seem to be more flexible with their affiliates, and often produce their own content and so have no licencing issues to worry about.

no Greenie, not upset with link-lists at all... upset with your new rule as some might follow... and would like to hear explanation of +4 pictures rule which no one asked.


freesites with COPIED Ads been removed long ago, I already answered for this of my mistakes and couple others on this board.

I've explained it 4 times already - if I make one thing bigger, then they all have to be bigger - site size, pics size, number of pics, length of movies (which was too long under the old rules but fits nicely now)

Yea...it was...

Well done! :D

So Greenie...did ya think these relatively innocuous changes would cause such a furor??? lol

Why the fuck does it matter what one person decides to do to his own private site? I think it has been quite a few years that Greenie has had to go out and beg for people to submit to link-o-rama. So, the answer for everyone pissing and moaning about rule changes is simple, submit someplace else. Even if it is a 20% increase of free porn that will be the downfall of this business :)

There are plenty of new linklists everyday that really want sites with only 20 pictures. Use them and worry about your own sites. I have never understood the thinking behind anyone believing they were due an explanation about someone else's site's rules.

We used to get a lot of that on GreenguyandJim as well. Until people realized that discussing business actually made you more money that wondering who would hit Lindsey Lohan. :)

For the record, I would hit Lindsey Lohan over and over and twice on Sunday.
OOPS! Scoot over Simon I'm going to hell with you.

Make that a threeso..... oh wait! Nevermind...that could be mis-interpreted :D

Well, just my 2 cents. I like the larger pic/24 pic rule. 10 pics always seemed kinda bare to me :)

hmmm wonder if we should make our hosted freesites 24 pics? feedback everyone?

|boobies|

I have to give my 2 cents on this topic again. After much consideration, yes, I would hit Lindsey Lohan but Id prefer to hit Morena Baccarin.

But seriously,

Jays requires 40 (ish)
PK requires 30
LOR requires 24

I hope now that theres a 1200 w+h rule that some ll's will up their 80kb and under file size rule a bit.

|thumb

no changes for me, I alway use 30 pics per free site. Just have to check for the pic size......

I thought there was ALWAYS a rule on Link-o-rama against pics on html pages. :P

dont seem very bad, but i do not like the 1200 rule, many sponsors do not have that big pictures, i dont see a point of this rule :(

FYI, it's 1200 combined width and height. A 750x450 pic passes the rule. :)

Almost all sponsors I can think of which don't offer content at least 750 don't offer any content at all. |loony|

i know its combined, my best sponsors offer 640*480 or similar, other good 1177 combined and so on :)

|sad|

Nice thing about the adult biz: you're forced to adapt quickly! |thumb

Jim;294152]Why the fuck does it matter what one person decides to do to his own private site?

No shit! Here are the rules. Do you meet the rules? If not move on. It seems everyone is so programmed that's the way we always did it and when it changes everybody freaks out.

Business changes daily and if you do not adjust, guess what you're out of business. I've owned a computer company since 1989 and if I didn't change my business model as I went along I would have been out of business in 1989.

Do you think that when a business makes a change (rules or whatever) that it's a knee jerk reaction? Of course not. It's a conscious decision that will make the business grow and take it to the next level.

And this is a business so if the business owner makes changes that's in the best interest of HIS business accept that fact and either comply or find something else to do that's more suitable (nothing changes)

My humble opinion.

Cheers

I've been watching the numbers over the last 2 weeks & I can honestly say that I am listing more sites per day & declining less & less, which is exactly what I was hoping for :)

Good for you, my friend.

Fuck those cocksuckers that try to tell you what to do with your own site. I have a few pet peeves and that is one of my biggest.

cool, that you list more sites, but its strange that happened after rules became more strict...

I wouldn't say more strict - I've always had pretty strict rules. I'd say that some rules make life easier & some make them harder.

Oddly enough, submits are down a bit, but since I'm listing more sites, I'm happy.

That's good stuff...congrats Greenie |thumb

Is there still room in the pot for my measly 2 cents?

Just wanted to add that on gay LL's the rules demand much much more free porn. I'm talking mins of 60 pictures for a Freesite and even more. I haven't tried building and submitting such sites, but I have been told by fellow WM's in the gay market that these FS sell just as well, if not better. Why? no idea. My point being that who knows, maybe more free samples doesn't cost you sales after all?

I have noticed a lot of gay sites that have 4 gallery pages - I assumed it was a trend with people that live & work next to each other & share server space & account codes :D

Thats exactly how it works. TGPs have proven this historically

Not that it will trigger a new size "arms race" but 1200 will now become the new standard.

Everybody will insure that their photos are 1200 rule for link lists that require it. In the process every link lists will end up with bigger thumbs.

There are still TGPs out there that require only 10 thumbs. You are not going to find any galleries listed there with only 10 thumbs because the bigger TGPs all require more.

sleeper - What does the size of the pics have to do with the size of them thumbs?

I was doing 20 things at once and worded it wrong.

Here is what I meant to say:

"Not that it will trigger a new size "arms race" but 1200 will now become the new standard.

Everybody will insure that their photos will pass the 1200 rule for link lists that require it. Beacuse of that every link lists will end up with size 1200+ photos

A example of this is how the number of images on TGP galleries has escalated through time.

There are still TGPs out there that require only 10 thumbs. You are not going to find any galleries listed there with only 10 thumbs because the bigger TGPs all require more."

Oh how I wish I had come across this thread 36 hours ago, lol. I spent Saturday preparing 20 new sets for our affiliates at bibucks.com at 660 x 440 (=1100 for the mathematically challenged). Oh well, ce la vie. So I redid the 20 sets at 740 x 493 this morning, and they are uploaded and ready for use. It's fresh hi-quality stuff if I do say so myself.

So I hope this post doesn't sound spammy but I wanted to give all my affiliates the heads-up in case some of you are looking for "1200 compliant" content. Click below to access the sets.

If you aren't an affiliate yet, click below to sign up at bibucks.com through Greenguy's affiliate code:
http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clic...ww.bibucks.com

- Coolegg ("the webmaster formerly known as Coolegypt")

New rules won't help sell content. Only cheapskates will benefit whenever you rise free content requirements.

Its hard to see (and then again not really) what the big uproar is about.

IMHO:
Been using 12, 14, 16 pics in my sites for a long while. Makes design variations easier and is probably better for surfers anyways.

1200 wide issue I can see problematic for some because it is true that most (a lot) sponsor content comes 640. I suspect that this is exactly the purpose of the rule: to lessen overused sponsor content and increase purchased, unique content. Gotta be a good thing.

More than 800px wide; well I think this just allows more sloppy designs but time will tell.

I guess I'm thinking most about Jim's comment on his pet peeve about "Its my list and I can do what I want" feelings. I would say that for 95% of the people this would be true.... but not for you guys.

Of course you can do what you want, that goes without saying but I think its no surprise of all the hand wringing these little changes cause every now and then because you handful of guys (and women) are the literal tail that wags the dog. Everything you do is seen and perceived as important and affecting the entire business model up and down the line just because you are the gorrillas, in traffic, reputation, and influence. Therefore, when you make a decision like rule and standards change you are really making a rule likely to apply accross the board at least in time. You have the enviable (maybe uneviable) position of affecting a lot of peoples actions and has its been said "change is scary" to some. Ultimately you are making a decision based on what you think is best for the list and maybe for the business but at the level of an LOR its also a decision for the niche of all serious freesite workers.

I don't have a problem with any of the rule changes either and agree with the general precept of "its my list...." but maybe significant rule changes could be announced well in advance here at the board and then such a big deal wouldn't follow.