do you really need reviewers anymore
 

I been think the whole reviewer process could easyly be automated

maybe time would be better spend policing by clicking links after they are listed and just tossing any submitters that you dont like

google dont have any reviewers and I am spending about 5k a month on saleries

anyone else ever think about this

Actually, Google does have reviewers. Bunches of people are hired by Google to check up on spam reports, quality, etc.

Though, listing first and doing a quality control after does seem appealing.

My only concern is without a human gatekeeper it'd be that much easier for a bot/multi-submitter to sneak through that door and flood your pages before human eyes noticed it.

well i never ment they would get listed blindly

the submits would go thru a bunch of filters before getting listed

the filters could check the movies and pics and the # of ads etc etc

with the paid partners my site is very quiet as far as cheaters go

I bet you could automate it enough where you could get by with 1 reviewer, but I'm not sure about no reviewers. But, I'm not on your linklists' level so I probably don't know what I'm talking about. |bow|

As Lowry knows, dragonlists has two levels of accounts, active & partner.

I've often thought about setting partner accounts to automatically list instead of going into the review bin. I can't remember the last time I rejected a partners freesite, as they build good clean sites and double-check everything. That would cut down my reviews by about 40%.

The thing is I'm very anal about the descriptions, so if I didn't manually review -- even just the partner's sites -- about 50% of the submits would have no punctuation and about the same amount would have sentence fragments.

Is it worth the hassle?.. |huh

Exactly right Preacher. In fact, I do have my partners set to autolisted but i do surf for quality control. |whisper|

For me, it saves a lot of time and as you said the partners are pretty good about building quality sites that hardly ever need policing... .02

but even if you wanted to be anal about the puntuation you could just email the webmaster and say could ya please be careful with this or that etc etc

a simple 20 mins a day clicking links

LOL, ever heard of CAPTCHA? If you think it's that easy to create a bot for it... let me know about it. There're probably less than 100 people in the World that know how to code that shit really well and they ain't wasting their time submitting sites, that's for sure. Just order yourself a nice unique version for your site and you're good to go IMO

I knew exactly what you meant. I don't take you for a fool. :D

Seems to me that if you have all this in place, assuming it works right, you could reduce the review work load rather then eliminate it all-together.

I suppose by making the system auto-list, the quality of your site will be dependent on reviewers independent of quantity. With individual submits reviewed before listing the quantity of your site is dependent on reviewers, but quality should stay stable. Does the contrast of the two make sense? |huh

Maybe I'm just a pessimist who thinks that because I can't program my own brain into a machine (yet |loony|) I wouldn't trust any machine to work correctly with the possibility that a bunch of humans might try to abuse it. Then again...

This is your #1 filter, so I imagine the other filters wouldn't have to catch as much as a site with completely open submits. ;)

Maybe i'm just stuck in the old days, but couldn't you find quality reviewers that would do it in exchange for links or traffic. I did reviews for a couple big sites and a tgp back in the day in exchange for links and traffic.

I'm sure you have an insane amount of daily submits, but getting a couple people to review for traffic instead of money might save you five grand per month.

The automated system would be great in a perfect world, but could have problems like; people placing info in wrong places, spelling and grammar errors as well as other human errors.

If you could have a script to check those, check the sites for banned words, links, pics, movies, etc., or only allowed your longest running or most trusted submitters to use it, then it could work great to eliminate or dramatically cut down submits.

Going from 1500 submits a day to 3 or 4 hundred would free up tons of time and money.

Brad

I can sorta see why you'd think this with the "partner only" thing, but even if I was, I'd still want to have a human look at the site before it was approved.

There's a lot of things that a bot can not see.