Link O'Rama Rule Changes (yipee)

Quotealex · 2006-08-16, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

What is it exactly that you don't like? .

Both actually. I like to make my fs with the least amount of pictures as required and make them as small as possible.

virgohippy · 2006-08-16, 08:45 PM

I'm more than happy about dropping the 800 screen width rule!

I don't think the pic size will affect the way I do things all that much either. Means my bandwidth will go up a bit... but... eh.

Warbot, I agree that giving away free stuff makes sales harder, but think about it this way: if sites that list links to 4 page ads have to compete with sites that list TONS of free galleries, can you see where there's a need to adapt?

Personally, I'd hate to see my warning page sales dissappear because all the surfers keep graduating to TGP's.

Whatever's necessary to keep the LL game going forward is good by me.

I think Greenie made a careful balance here. And I, for one, take no shame in being a copycat!

Bill · 2006-08-16, 08:56 PM

I don't like it because I think it sends a subliminal signal to the surfers that we are more desperate for their eyeballs, and that our content, all content, is therefore worth less.

I've never had any problem with the 800 standard, and I don't care about it one way or the other.

But upping picture size and number devalues all of our work, without in any significant way adding to anybodies business, neither linklists nor builders.

It will just lead to another size 'arms race' as everybody tries to position themselves to their best advantage - in the end we are back exactly where we started, but with a devalued product.

But what can you do? Not much. Devaluation of our business is presumably inevitable.

kenny · 2006-09-06, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill

I don't like it because I think it sends a subliminal signal to the surfers that we are more desperate for their eyeballs, and that our content, all content, is therefore worth less.

I've never had any problem with the 800 standard, and I don't care about it one way or the other.

But upping picture size and number devalues all of our work, without in any significant way adding to anybodies business, neither linklists nor builders.

It will just lead to another size 'arms race' as everybody tries to position themselves to their best advantage - in the end we are back exactly where we started, but with a devalued product.

But what can you do? Not much. Devaluation of our business is presumably inevitable.

Thats exactly how it works. TGPs have proven this historically

kenny · 2006-09-06, 02:40 AM

Not that it will trigger a new size "arms race" but 1200 will now become the new standard.

Everybody will insure that their photos are 1200 rule for link lists that require it. In the process every link lists will end up with bigger thumbs.

There are still TGPs out there that require only 10 thumbs. You are not going to find any galleries listed there with only 10 thumbs because the bigger TGPs all require more.

ponygirl · 2006-08-16, 08:48 PM

I'm going to venture into the fray here

I do prefer bigger thumbs, simply because it pisses me off to no end to surf and see tiny little pics. I think it's a waste of a surfer's time to have to click thru to each pic to see which ones they like. I see the bigger thumbs as a preview to the bigger pic, so what's the point if they can't even make it out? One pic can make a sale if it hits the right nerve

I also have stated that I think 12 thumbs makes it easier for a builder to vary their gallery templates. You can arrange 12 differently more easily than 10 imo (and from what I see as a reviewer myself).

As for the full size, well ever since Cleo upped her pic size rules I've been making them bigger too (not quite 1200 combined, but close) and to be honest, I really haven't noticed a difference in click thrus or conversions. If they're going to buy, they're going to buy because they want to & your site is the best they see advertising what they wanted anyway. You catch more flies with honey...and all that

but that's just my opinion. I don't think GG is going to see many people taking him out of their submit list, and if they do, well more for me

2006-08-16, 08:45 PM	#2
virgohippy Madness is like gravity. All it takes is a little... push. Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Posts: 1,679	I'm more than happy about dropping the 800 screen width rule! I don't think the pic size will affect the way I do things all that much either. Means my bandwidth will go up a bit... but... eh. Warbot, I agree that giving away free stuff makes sales harder, but think about it this way: if sites that list links to 4 page ads have to compete with sites that list TONS of free galleries, can you see where there's a need to adapt? Personally, I'd hate to see my warning page sales dissappear because all the surfers keep graduating to TGP's. Whatever's necessary to keep the LL game going forward is good by me. I think Greenie made a careful balance here. And I, for one, take no shame in being a copycat! __________________ ~Warm and Fuzzy.

2006-09-06, 02:40 AM	#5
kenny No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 233	Not that it will trigger a new size "arms race" but 1200 will now become the new standard. Everybody will insure that their photos are 1200 rule for link lists that require it. In the process every link lists will end up with bigger thumbs. There are still TGPs out there that require only 10 thumbs. You are not going to find any galleries listed there with only 10 thumbs because the bigger TGPs all require more. __________________ Please Re-Read The Rules For Sig Files

2006-08-16, 08:48 PM	#6
ponygirl on vacation Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,095	I'm going to venture into the fray here I do prefer bigger thumbs, simply because it pisses me off to no end to surf and see tiny little pics. I think it's a waste of a surfer's time to have to click thru to each pic to see which ones they like. I see the bigger thumbs as a preview to the bigger pic, so what's the point if they can't even make it out? One pic can make a sale if it hits the right nerve I also have stated that I think 12 thumbs makes it easier for a builder to vary their gallery templates. You can arrange 12 differently more easily than 10 imo (and from what I see as a reviewer myself). As for the full size, well ever since Cleo upped her pic size rules I've been making them bigger too (not quite 1200 combined, but close) and to be honest, I really haven't noticed a difference in click thrus or conversions. If they're going to buy, they're going to buy because they want to & your site is the best they see advertising what they wanted anyway. You catch more flies with honey...and all that but that's just my opinion. I don't think GG is going to see many people taking him out of their submit list, and if they do, well more for me __________________ Submit Your Porn I do CSS coding Hosting - JMB Scripts - Tube Site Resources Last edited by ponygirl; 2006-08-16 at 08:49 PM.. Reason: 2 posts while I made mine - this is a hot topic isn't it ;)

2006-08-16, 08:56 PM	#3
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	I don't like it because I think it sends a subliminal signal to the surfers that we are more desperate for their eyeballs, and that our content, all content, is therefore worth less. I've never had any problem with the 800 standard, and I don't care about it one way or the other. But upping picture size and number devalues all of our work, without in any significant way adding to anybodies business, neither linklists nor builders. It will just lead to another size 'arms race' as everybody tries to position themselves to their best advantage - in the end we are back exactly where we started, but with a devalued product. But what can you do? Not much. Devaluation of our business is presumably inevitable.