|
Sundiver, about a year ago, a discussion here lead to the revealing of a single host name that was banned. Within hours, certain webmaster chat boards were filled with ways to get around the ban, how to set up other name servers, the host tried to contract out boxes on another host to move people, etc. It wasn't to stop the reasons that they would have been banned for, but instead to help the exact set of cheaters that were banned to work their way around the blocks. They were not going to make their sites better, remove the toolbar downloaders, the geo redirections, or re-install the images that 404ed to console hell, but they were sure going to try to trick us into listing their shit sites again.
I don't think very many link sites used a shared host ban list. I think pretty much each link site owner arrives at the same place by themselves. When we see cheaters, we attempt to find out who they are and what relationship they may have with past cheaters. We INDIVIDUALLY look for the best ways to protect out sites against people wasting out time, resources, and fucking surfers over. In the end, that many link sites have come to the pretty much the same set of conclusions should tell you something.
There is a shared blacklist (that I don't use) for individual emails or domains. It isn't any different from the posts in the "possible cheater" section on this board, except that the effects are a little more regular. Only a very few sites at the top of the chain can actually add bans that affect all sites. Everyone else maintains their own list plus the main list - but they cannot add to that main list. THere is no chance that a link site with 50 hits a day total traffic can randomly ban you and stop you from getting listed at Richard's, Link-o-rama, or other sites using that particular blacklist.
Link lists are not bound to list you. Satisfaction is not suggested, implied, or offered. How they choose to not list you is up to them.
Alex
|