Join price in link texts?

[Lemmy]

I agree with Licker4You on this one. A statement that something costs money, that you'll have to whip out the CC to get access to the goodies, pretty much "un-blinds" any link to me even if the site name isn't specifically mentioned. "Get access to all her pics for only $3.95" works just fine.

Conversely it's possible to technically work in the name of a paysite in a link and it remains blind. "Click Here To Watch Bushy Beavers" (where bushybeavers.com is a paysite) just sounds like an invitation to look at some hairy pussy pics. I see a lot of this lately, and to me it's just sneaky.

[ladydesigner]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

I agree with Licker4You on this one. A statement that something costs money, that you'll have to whip out the CC to get access to the goodies, pretty much "un-blinds" any link to me even if the site name isn't specifically mentioned. "Get access to all her pics for only $3.95" works just fine.

I'm going to politely disagree with you here Lemmy.
Even though the price is mentioned in the link (which clearly tells the surfer they'll have to pay if they click), where's that text link go?? Maybe someone can shed some light on this for me and I'll be proved wrong and make adjustments on what sites I decline for blind links.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by ladydesigner

Maybe someone can shed some light on this for me and I'll be proved wrong and make adjustments on what sites I decline for blind links.

I think you're nuts. Would that be considered proof?

Honestly, some you ask too much from text links. I would almost expect to see a list of 2 or 3 acceptable text links, which your submitters must use, displayed on your submit page. I blame MadMax for most of this blind link insanity. Where is he, damn it?

[JackDaniel's]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

I blame MadMax for most of this blind link insanity. Where is he, damn it?

You mean this one ? http://greenguysboard.com/board/show...ht=blind+links

[Lemmy]

Originally Posted by ladydesigner

I'm going to politely disagree with you here Lemmy.
Even though the price is mentioned in the link (which clearly tells the surfer they'll have to pay if they click), where's that text link go?? Maybe someone can shed some light on this for me and I'll be proved wrong and make adjustments on what sites I decline for blind links.

Hey LD I don't think there's a right and a wrong here, different folks, different strokes, that's all.

Personally I'm fine if I think any reasonable surfer should understand that the link takes them to a place where they're expected to pay to see more. Of course that's a subjective judement, and on my LLs I'm the one who makes it, so submitters shouldn't push their luck.

My "nazi-ness" when it comes to blind links goes in waves. While I used to be a stickler for technicalities I'm much more concerned with sneakyness these days. If I feel the link is intentionally deceptive the site is out, regardless of whether it technically adheres to the rules.

All this said, I tend to play it safe with my own sites. I always include such terms as "Get Full Access to...:, "Click Here For a FREE Tour" or "CLICK TO JOIN" etc. etc. while including the paysite name either in the link itself or in supporting text.

[ladydesigner]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

All this said, I tend to play it safe with my own sites. I always include such terms as "Get Full Access to...:, "Click Here For a FREE Tour" or "CLICK TO JOIN" etc. etc. while including the paysite name either in the link itself or in supporting text.

That's exactly what I do with my own free sites so I guess I had just adopted that as a rule when reviewing for my link lists. I decline some really nice sites for what I call "blind links". I guess I'll defer to all this peer pressure and go a little easier on what I reject text links for.

[Preacher]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

I agree with Licker4You on this one. A statement that something costs money, that you'll have to whip out the CC to get access to the goodies, pretty much "un-blinds" any link to me even if the site name isn't specifically mentioned. "Get access to all her pics for only $3.95" works just fine.

I agree 100%

If it costs them something, it costs them something... To me it doesn't matter where it costs them something.

[Licker4U]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

A statement that something costs money, that you'll have to whip out the CC to get access to the goodies, pretty much "un-blinds" any link to me even if the site name isn't specifically mentioned. "Get access to all her pics for only $3.95" works just fine.

Originally Posted by Preacher

I agree 100%

If it costs them something, it costs them something... To me it doesn't matter where it costs them something.

I guess that's what I was referring to when Dare mentioned Billy Bob. As long as Billy Bob has pictures that the surfer expects to get, in this case, the girls pics after pulling out the CC, it shouldn't matter exactly which site the surfer winds up at. Like I said, might just be semantics, different folk, different strokes.

[KG Gary]

Trouble is, it's almost impossible to group all the link lists which would consider that one a blind link together in one recip table.
Is the inclusion of the paysite name in every outbound link enough of a problem to face some declines at some link lists?


I'd love to be let loose without the restrictions of strict blind link rules, but while there's a chance of declines from enough link lists, and even though it's gets very repetitive typing at "paysite name", the rejections aren't worth the risk, imho.

[Licker4U]

I was hoping this thread would soften some hearts...

[ladydesigner]

Originally Posted by Licker4U

I was hoping this thread would soften some hearts...

Consider mine softened (somewhat)!

[Licker4U]

Originally Posted by ladydesigner

Consider mine softened (somewhat)!

WOOOHOOO Now all we have to work on is that "all pages in the same folder" thing. By the way, what's the reason for that? I know of maybe two others that require that.