Question For All
 

I have a question, but first a little catch up. Bear with me.

I have been in this business since 1996, always trying to produce original sites and offer something different from the same ol same ol. I have submitted to countless links pages over the years but have seen a scary trend over the past few years which has discouraged me from submitting to links pages any more. Links pages are trying to dictate how we design our sites, what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable. They all have their own guidelines and in so doing have suceeded in creating countless sites that look alike! By far the worse listings are on Persian Kitty where 80% of those listed are nothing more then AD pages, but still follow their guidelines. I've been listed on Persian Kitty off and on, and about up to 4 years ago the traffic was good enough to persuade you to join the crap and design another carbon crappy site just to get listed, but then the traffic got lower and I said the hell with that I don't need it any more.

My question is why aren't more webmasters voicing their disaproval about link pages "guidelines" or restrictions? I think a links page should offer links, NOT judge content or design. If more webmasters had the balls to speak up you would see more and more link pages easying up on their "guidelines".

I know what some may say, we need some sort of guide lines, and I agree, but links pages go way too far! Beyond any common sense and entering a film critics stage! So why keep silent about it? Speak up! If you don't like the guidelines do NOT submit!

I get the same crap from billers too! CCBill didn't like some of my keywords in meta tags, I told them if they didn't like it they can F**K off! I now use another biller. We webmasters take too much sh*t from too many people. We need to stand up for ourselves and stick up for each other. As long as our sites are book legal, nothing else should matter.

Now can any one direct me to a good links page and not a site critic? |waves|

Kindest Regards to all!

Jimbo,

I dont believe that your views are going to get much agreement here....

Linklists have rules for very specific reasons(and so does CCBill for that matter), and those rules are designed to ensure the success and longevity of those linklists.

If I start listing crap.. surfers leave and so does my traffic, and therefore your listed site goets no traffic..... it's that simple

DD

Jimbo, I actually had a nice long post all written, re-read it, and then decide that I could sum it all up better much more quickly in a simple statement:

if you don't like it, move along and build your own. Nobody is forcing you to submit to those link sites, just in the same way nobody forced you to use ccbill. If you don't like it, start your own.

It's that easy!

Alex

But I'm seeing crap now, aren't you? I agree we need some guidelines, but many lists go too far. The only thing we are succeding in doing is producing carbon copy sites. As for ccbill, how does mega tags effect longevity? They break no laws. As I said, as long as a site is book legal, nothing else should matter. When we start nit picking over keywords or becoming site critics because we just don't like the design, we go too far. Certainly there should be some guidelines, but I believe most lists go too far. Take a few minutes and go thru some of the links on PK. And come back and tell me if this proceedure is working. I would be verry suprised if most webmaster would not agree with this, atleast privately any way.

to RawAlex
 

I believe I said basically the same thing. My question is why more webmasters don't speak up|rasta|

Jimbo,
I think if you look around a little here, you will find that people disagree on certain points all the time. I agree with parts of your post, and disagree with others.

You have hit on the main reason lists can do this (beside's the fact that it is their list). It is supply and demand. As long as there are hundreds of people standing in line for the traffic (no matter how strict the rules), then there is no reason to change a thing.

I do disagree with this statement though:
For the most part, I am pretty lenient about the sites I review. But, I will not list sites that talk of "y*oung boys/girls", I will not list fantasy inc*st sites, and I don't list sites where the theme of the site is a passed out drunk woman getting fucked. These sites may be perfectly legal, but I still don't list them. I haven't banned any sponsors per se, but I don't list Little April sites either. Nothing against the guys running it. I think they are legit, but that girl just looks very young in everything.

I guess this was a long way of saying I understand your frustration, and try not to dictate how my submitters build their sites, but a few rules aren't such a bad thing.

Jennifer

Just as DD said, most of the rules are in order to keep quality high for our surfers. When I started my LL a few months back, I was determined to keep the rules simpler than most of the other LLs out there. I have slowly but shurely been forced to adopt more rules just to cut down on the number of absolute crap submissions. Again if I list crappy sites and my surfers don't come back, no sites on my list get any traffic. Now, my LL isn't all that big yet, but you know what? I built the list up and continue to spend countless hours driving traffic to it...and it's MY traffic.

If you take a good look at most of the LL rules out there, they are MINIMUMS and DON'Ts. It all boils down to this: Build quality sites with quality content that don't promote illegal crap or try to trick surfers and aren't banner farms, and you will get listed in most places. It's sad that we have to break that simple concept down into 20+ rules in order to get the message across, but LL rules are a response to the quality of submissions, not the cause of it.

to jennym
 

I've been creating special niche sites right from the start. I have taken the drunk passed out girls theme to the limits, even hypnotised, comatose, if you can think of it, we did it! And All of my material is original and custom made! Been doing it since 1996. Have made a living off it, WITHOUT any links to any lists too. It just saddens me that nobody will list it because soo much work goes in to it. You can't buy content like mine, you have to make it yourself. Is it filthy? Yes. But we deal in born, it's suppose to be dirty and filthy. I started with the passed out girls and shemales back in 96 and have tried almost everything. Ironically, the material that most people "object" to are the most lucrative...
GO FIGURE!

Kindest Regards!

Re: to jennym
 

What is it about the pk links that mean when you say "not working"?

Of course the borderline illegal and illegal sells well.

So Jimbo...

Your complaint is that LL's wont list your sites that are in fact 'rape' sites?

Why are you surprised by this?

It will ALWAYS be the choice of each LL as to what they list.... that will never change.

DD

borderline??? either it's legal or not. If it's legal, no problem. If it's illegal Big Problem. That was all I was saying. The problem lies with this "borderline" mentality (no offense), because we insert our own personal views when we really shouldn't.

For example, what if I find but f**king guys totally immoral and sick and should be illegal, what if I found that just as sick as CP? And I then proceeded to reject any sites for having it? See where I'm going? We can't, or shouldn't let our personal feelings influence links. We need to be able to seperate our personal feelings and simply go by the laws, insert some good comon sense rules and guidelines is all I am advocating.

Regards!

The problem I see with passed out drunk girls, is this. How do I know it's legal? If it is thrown out there as 'rape', then that is how I am going to perceive it. I don't know who shot the content, I don't know anything about it. I look at it, I see rape, I decline.

Start you own list and then you can ban butt fucking men then if you want to.

My list, my rules. Follow them and submit or don't submit… that choice is yours.

I'm actually more interested in the PK comment than the borderline thing, but I'll answer your borderline question.

I say borderline because some things are illegal in certain states or countries, and that exposes the publisher to obscenity cases. Drunk girls for instance is at least theoretically illegal in several states ( no actual prosecutions that I know of...). Bondage with penetration is illegal in Canada, for example. That's why I say borderline.

There is no such thing as something either being illegal or it's not. All law is subject to interpretation at any time. "Morals" laws like those concerning porn are especially vulnerable to changes in the political climate.

Jimbo - I have one simple question:

Have you ever run a link list?

If your answer is "no", then please do not try & tell people that do run them how they should be run.

But they are not rape sites. I only have one passed out site or any thing like that, all my sites are different. My passed out site is based on girls passed out. Not attacked, although I have recently added attacked, why not, won't get listed any way. My site started out girls asleep, then progressed to what it is now. In fact you won't even find the word "rape" any where on my site or meta tags. BTW, the words ccbill objected to was "young" and "girls", I never had the word rape. Actually This site WAS indeed listed here on link-o-rama when it was called xxxsleepers.com, identical to it now but I decided to change the domain name. I understand how you can get rape out of it, but i do not place it in the same category, nor do rape links pages which find it too calm. Any way, rape or no rape, so what. It's on TV and the movies and nobody is objecting. Just here on the web we want to police each other. Ironic because we are all involved in porn.

Regards!

I did have a links page, I ran it for about 2 years, I also had 5 topsites. Please don't take offense. I am genuinely curious as to why things got to where they are today with out any objections.

I wasn't telling you how to run it, I was asking why more people do not object to the strict guidelines and personal opinions of "most" LL is all. In fact, I compliment you for being at least accessable!

Kindest Regards!

I pass out and someone fucks me that is rape.

What part of this do you not fucking understand?

Top Lists are a completely different animal & you can't really compare them to Link Lists. I'm sure there are some similarities, but not enough for this conversation.

How many submits a day were you getting on your "links page"?

like I said in my post,

"... I understand how you can get rape out of it"

Why is it people try to tell other people what to do with their traffic? If someone doesn't list your sites, just move on to someone that will.

I never really pushed it aggrssively so i only got at most about 10 to 20 submits a day. I understand that is nothing to what you must get even in one hour. I had rules too. I know where your coming from. I'm just saying some LL go too far thats all.

Regards!

So it would be ok then if you passed out and a guy butt fucked you?

Well, the give examples of who's gone to far & what they've gone too far with.

Throwing PK's name out there knowing that she doens't post here is not a good way to prove a point.

And you probably don't know that many Link Lists ban people on a daily basis for submitting what we call "template sites" which seem to be what you are bitching about seeing.

So let's here some examples. Post some sites that you've submitted that were declined & we can go from there.