Dont submit sites with cheater LLs recips

[Mr. Blue]

lol, I run TGP's and it's pretty much the same mentality. I mean there's 4000 or so TGPs out there and around 40 that actually update and send decent traffic daily.

When I started submitting freesites again I used the quality over quantity equation and it seems to work nicely that way. Still, if there's a specific LL that pisses you off because they've cheated one way or another...it just seems easier to me to post their names on your rules page.

[Surfn]

I see several of you asking us to add the sites we won't list to our rules/submit pages. My reply is simple: Why should we do that when they come and go?

Here's the best tip for not getting rejected by any LL for having a link to someone they don't like for whatever reason, look at their friends list. Most lists have a list of friends longer than the number of recips most submitters use. Submit to those friends and use their recips and you won't get rejected for putting a link list in what they consider a bad neighborhood.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Surfn

I see several of you asking us to add the sites we won't list to our rules/submit pages. My reply is simple: Why should we do that when they come and go?

I only submit to 22 LL and they're all well known, but for argument sake, let me just take a wack at this topic.

If you have a specific list of say 15 LL's that you deem cheating...that would take up maybe 1 line or 2 on the rules page. Wouldn't it ultimately save you time, the submitter time, etc by just posting it? I mean FilthyEarl for example, I know who UW doesn't want to be linked with and I don't. I also removed them from my submit list ages ago because of it. Just from this thread we have this list:

Cherry Picked Links, Porn Fresh, Fetish Crawler, J Loves Porn, fuckthensuck, linksforadult, flashinglinks, webadultlinks

For me it just seems like a quicker method. Linkster also stated, "...there are a lot of LL owners posting on this board who dont care that they cheat." For me it just makes it too much of a guessing game to figure out which linklist owner would think one thing is cheating and one thing isn't cheating.

So, throw 'em under the bus if you think they cheat, let the submitter know. For me the rules page is the guidelines to get listed or not...leaving out information just causes extra work for all involved.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blue

I only submit to 22 LL and they're all well known, but for argument sake, let me just take a wack at this topic.

If you have a specific list of say 15 LL's that you deem cheating...that would take up maybe 1 line or 2 on the rules page. Wouldn't it ultimately save you time, the submitter time, etc by just posting it? I mean FilthyEarl for example, I know who UW doesn't want to be linked with and I don't. I also removed them from my submit list ages ago because of it. Just from this thread we have this list:

Cherry Picked Links, Porn Fresh, Fetish Crawler, J Loves Porn, fuckthensuck, linksforadult, flashinglinks, webadultlinks

For me it just seems like a quicker method. Linkster also stated, "...there are a lot of LL owners posting on this board who dont care that they cheat." For me it just makes it too much of a guessing game to figure out which linklist owner would think one thing is cheating and one thing isn't cheating.

So, throw 'em under the bus if you think they cheat, let the submitter know. For me the rules page is the guidelines to get listed or not...leaving out information just causes extra work for all involved.

Who said this businesses is easy? Like I said I'm not going to bother listing them. Want to get listed with me use reputable lists other than mine.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Surfn

Who said this businesses is easy? Like I said I'm not going to bother listing them. Want to get listed with me use reputable lists other than mine.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to run anything. I'm just giving my opinion based on my experience as a submitter and as a TGP owner. I've always viewed the rules page as the Holy Grail to getting listed. As a submitter if I follow the rules, I hope my chances of getting listed at TGPs/LLs are better than average. If there are implied rules that aren't specified by a LL or TGP owner...I just think it creates a needless step in the process for both owner and submitter.

[Mateusz]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blue

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to run anything. I'm just giving my opinion based on my experience as a submitter and as a TGP owner. I've always viewed the rules page as the Holy Grail to getting listed. As a submitter if I follow the rules, I hope my chances of getting listed at TGPs/LLs are better than average. If there are implied rules that aren't specified by a LL or TGP owner...I just think it creates a needless step in the process for both owner and submitter.

I submit only few LL and I know none of the owners cheat but I second what Mr. Blue said.
And yes.. it changes a lot when LL owners inform their submiters about decline reason (as Linkseter said) but otherwise IMO it's a bit unfair.

[Mr. Blue]

Linkster's a class act and he does and would go that extra mile to notify someone regarding the recip thing. I completely respect the way he runs his LL, from partner submits, to the single blessed recip, he just really gets top marks in my books for the way he runs things.

I was more or less commenting on the freesites that get rejected daily for inadvertently breaking this unwritten rule and if they would ever get notified regarding it.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blue

Linkster's a class act and he does and would go that extra mile to notify someone regarding the recip thing. I completely respect the way he runs his LL, from partner submits, to the single blessed recip, he just really gets top marks in my books for the way he runs things.

I was more or less commenting on the freesites that get rejected daily for inadvertently breaking this unwritten rule and if they would ever get notified regarding it.

Since you are not a partner on any of my sites you would not know that I do email submitters informing them when something needs to be fixed.

But that's fine call me anything you like. Assumptions are a very common trait.

[quest]

Surfn has sent me email in the past informing me of an error I had,
not a recip error, more of a coding error.
I would have to say that was a Classy act, as well as very much appreciated.

I would also have to say it does take time to get LLs recips paired
together with who likes who. That by looking at their friends list and time in the biz.



Ben

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Mateusz

I submit only few LL and I know none of the owners cheat but I second what Mr. Blue said.
And yes.. it changes a lot when LL owners inform their submiters about decline reason (as Linkster said) but otherwise IMO it's a bit unfair.

I'd have to agree. It's not fair to reject a site because of the submitter's inability to read the reviewer's mind. If the reviewer takes the time to inform the submitter of the reason why and let them resubmit if they choose to make the necesary change(s), then that's fine.

I personally don't know of very many lists that I can call cheaters/scumbags. So, if you see me sticking with a short list, that's because they are the only ones that I've seen reputable board members complain about. I have no reason to believe that there are more than the ones that have been named in this thread.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by quest

Surfn has sent me email in the past informing me of an error I had,
not a recip error, more of a coding error.
I would have to say that was a Classy act, as well as very much appreciated.

I would also have to say it does take time to get LLs recips paired
together with who likes who. That by looking at their friends list and time in the biz.



Ben

Thanks Ben you know I will always take care of my trusted submitters.

Unfortunately your words are falling on deaf ears because most of the posters in this forum have made up their minds. They think I should do business their way and won't listen to anything I have to say. Which is fine. I don't need them for partners either

[MrYum]

This is one of those issues where I can see both sides of the equation. For several reasons, I won't be posting names of offending link sites on my rules page.

For what it's worth, the only offending link sites that aren't already mentioned in this thread are those owned by a certain 'yafool' who I quite simply want nothing to do with. Pretty sure everyone can figure out who that is

However, as I always have...I will notify submitters if they're submitting with a known asshat on their recip page to me. For that matter, I still send out a rejection mail for whatever the reason the site didn't make the cut.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Surfn

Since you are not a partner on any of my sites you would not know that I do email submitters informing them when something needs to be fixed.

But that's fine call me anything you like. Assumptions are a very common trait.

I didn't mention your name in that list. As I don't submit to your LL I wouldn't make that assumption on whether you would or wouldn't contact someone...that's why I didn't specifically mention any names and kept the conversation in generalities. The only people I did mention were Linkster and UW...because I submit to both and know both would go out of their way to contact. Now that you've said you would contact as well, I would certainly put you in the same category as the two mentioned.

My comments were only meant for discussion sake and nothing more. It wasn't meant as a point of criticism or praise, it was just meant for a little interesting back and forth discussion on a topic

[Preacher]

Originally Posted by MrYum

Running a link site is definitely not for the feint of heart or those looking for a quick buck. It's more of a long LONG term love/hate kinda thang...lol.

Amen...

When I submit a free-site -- a rare occurance nowadays -- I only submit to regualar posters on GG & Jim.

This boards given me a lot and I want to give back to those that have helped and supported me. Besides...regular posters here are either honest or obviously not and it's easy to avoid those few.

[Shakhtar]

Originally Posted by Linkster

I would add these to the list - just some quick ones I found in the cheaters forum:
fuckthensuck
linksforadult
flashinglinks
webadultlinks

Im pretty sure they were added because of being multisubmitters using fake names and emails

From January 7th I'm the owner of webadultlinks.com. Linkster, please remove the site from your list.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Shakhtar

From January 7th I'm the owner of webadultlinks.com. Linkster, please remove the site from your list.

Why?

[Shakhtar]

This is obvious. I'm not responsible for what the previous owner did.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Shakhtar

This is obvious. I'm not responsible for what the previous owner did.

And how is that suppose to be obvious to anyone?

[Shakhtar]

Look, friend, I'm not gonna argue. You are welcome to have an opinion of your own.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Shakhtar

Look, friend, I'm not gonna argue. You are welcome to have an opinion of your own.

I'm not here to argue either. Whether or not you just bought it makes no difference, it's black listed. Have a nice day