General Question

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Greenguy

Useless & Surfn - if he trimmed it down to this, would you accept it?

© 2006 http://www.domainname.com 2257

(or maybe text like Domain Name linked to the root)

If the page he was linking to was a 2257 link, that'd be fine, but that's not what he's doing. In my little book of spells, it clearly states that any link to any page that is a non-exit or non-2257 shall be counted. That link is promoting his hub or whatever he's putting on the root of the domain.

Off the record, since I currently don't take public submissions, I've actually become rather lax about counting links. But if I did have a public page, I would reject the site for that fourth link even if it was so tiny that I might mistake it as dust on my screen. I'm like a reviewing ninja, inflicting pain on my submitters as I prance around the room in my little black leotards.

[ponygirl]

I'm like a reviewing ninja, inflicting pain on my submitters as I prance around the room in my little black leotards.

this thread is useless without pics

anyway, to justify that post - I'd take it if it was like a copyright, not obviously trying to get the surfer to go there if the site is otherwise good. It's hard to get good submitters these days

Ponygirl

[Useless]

Originally Posted by ponygirl

I'd take it if it was like a copyright, not obviously trying to get the surfer to go there...

But a copyright doesn't require it to be a link. Hell, a copyright doesn't even require mentioning since copyrights are inherent. Ignored, but inherent.

If it wasn't a link, it would be a no-brainer. Well, it would be a no-brainer for most people. I'd still analyze the shit out of it and come up with a very solid reason to reject because of it, such as too many vowels in the domain name or something like that.

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

But a copyright doesn't require it to be a link. Hell, a copyright doesn't even require mentioning since copyrights are inherent. Ignored, but inherent.

If it wasn't a link, it would be a no-brainer. Well, it would be a no-brainer for most people. I'd still analyze the shit out of it and come up with a very solid reason to reject because of it, such as too many vowels in the domain name or something like that.

hehe
I don't link mine just for this reason - you never know who's got a burr up their ass about this kind of stuff
Actually, I'd figure you probably get more type-in traffic or surfers poking around going to your root anyway than a copyright link way at the bottom in tiny print, so why chance getting declined anywhere if you don't have to?

Ponygirl

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by ponygirl

hehe
I don't link mine just for this reason - you never know who's got a burr up their ass about this kind of stuff
Actually, I'd figure you probably get more type-in traffic or surfers poking around going to your root anyway than a copyright link way at the bottom in tiny print anyway, so why chance getting declined anywhere if you don't have to?

Ponygirl

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

But a copyright doesn't require it to be a link. Hell, a copyright doesn't even require mentioning since copyrights are inherent. Ignored, but inherent.

If it wasn't a link, it would be a no-brainer. Well, it would be a no-brainer for most people. I'd still analyze the shit out of it and come up with a very solid reason to reject because of it, such as too many vowels in the domain name or something like that.

Sheesh...what a hard ass...damn good thing you've got your looks and sparkling disposition goin for ya

It really does come down to the ol "don't give reviewers (UW) a reason to decline" thing. And as evidenced by this thread, I certainly wouldn't 'recommend' someone use the link. But, as Ponygirl mentioned...good quality submitters are the exception rather than the rule these days

So, yea...if the site is clean...I may look the other way on something small like that little link. What the hell, if the builder wants to get a little linkage to his root...it's no skin off my nose. Although, with a honker this size...I've certainly got skin to spare

I'm getting so bombarded with the crazy fuckers who don't speak the language...dissolute this and dissident that...crowd, I'm not gonna trash a quality site over a small copyright link.

[karomesis]

It's hard to get good submitters these days

But, as Ponygirl mentioned...good quality submitters are the exception rather than the rule these days

count me in as the exeption to the rule My submissions will resemble the clockwork like payments that so many sponsors engratiate their affiliates to expecting.

I like to make very clean sites that would get accepted on just about any link list, excepting the ugly one or two that come out when I haven't had enough coffee Any input would be appreciated!

I am in the same boat, the way I look at it is, if the LL owner says to jump; I say how high. What is the point of the biz? to make dough right? if we work together we make more instead of less, works for me.

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by karomesis

count me in as the exeption to the rule My submissions will resemble the clockwork like payments that so many sponsors engratiate their affiliates to expecting.



I am in the same boat, the way I look at it is, if the LL owner says to jump; I say how high. What is the point of the biz? to make dough right? if we work together we make more instead of less, works for me.

Good to hear Karomesis

It's pretty damn rare that a link list owner does something specifically to make things harder on submitters. There's ALWAYS a reason...and it's usually directly related to some unscrupulous asshat doing bad things

I've said it many times, but this is a symbiotic thing we have going here...submitters want traffic...link sites want quality free sites. It's really not a tough equation to figure out...but you'd be amazed how many try to find ways to circumvent that symbiosis