Greenguy's Board


Go Back   Greenguy's Board > General Business Knowledge
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 2007-07-25, 11:45 PM   #1
Useless
Certified Nice Person
 
Useless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dirty Undies, NY
Posts: 11,268
Send a message via ICQ to Useless
I'm declaring the thread's topic dead. I shall leave it forgotten, covered with maggots on the roadside. |shocking|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Spock View Post
Surely much more text is required (unlinked) with the punchline linked? What are your thoughts?
At the risk of sounding like a rebel, I'm going to give you my thoughts. You'll have wished that you hadn't asked and, by the time you're doing reading this, you'll wonder why you asked.

I've been thinking about free sites a lot lately. OK, not a LOT,but more than I should.

The free sites which are being submitted to link lists are not designed for sales or search engines. They're designed for a quick and easy review.
There are three kinds of people who make a living off of these free sites today:
Those who build and submit every day.
Those who are on the top of their sales text writing game.
Those who are a combination of the first two.

Anyone can earn a few bucks off of free sites - even me (I have the $25 checks to prove it), but few make their living from them.

I wonder why people fret over the idea of link lists using rel="nofollow". Do they actually believe that their free sites are anything special? Do they think that a free site is a SE powerhouse waiting to take the SERPS by storm? Peshaa! They're shit. They're pretty, but they're shit. They're pretty shit.

Fuck. I forgot what my point was. Ummm...

Oh yeah - free sites should have more pages, though not more content than what we use now. Spread it out a bit. Keep the warning page since it makes the most sales (probably because link list surfers are idiots and have given up looking for content and are now willing to pay, not knowing that the pics are another page away). I'd drop the main page and any other sort of consolidated navigation system. The free site should be linear; one page after the other. Each gallery page would have 5-8 nice thumbs. Nice, as in quality and size. Each page would have much more text. Not just keyword stuffed BS, but a common man's review of the site being promoted. Every page would be of a similar theme, but each would have a slightly different keyword phrase being pushed. The page would be named for that phrase and the anchor text used in the link to that page, found on the preceding gallery page, would use that phrase. And of course, the pics would named according to the page they're on, using minor variations of the page's set of keywords. For 24 pics, you could easily have four SEO'd gallery pages, plus a warning page.

I also think that the links out on a page should be determined by the flow and design of the page, not by a set limit. (ducking to avoid flying tomatoes) Why 3? Why not 2, or 7? It's an arbitrary number, isn't it?

So, what I'm trying to say is, yes - more text.
__________________
Click here to purchase a bridge I'm selling.

Last edited by Useless; 2007-07-25 at 11:48 PM..
Useless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-07-26, 08:33 AM   #2
Simon
That which does not kill us, will try, try again.
 
Simon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conch Republic
Posts: 5,150
Send a message via ICQ to Simon Send a message via AIM to Simon Send a message via Yahoo to Simon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Useless Warrior View Post
At the risk of sounding like a rebel, I'm going to give you my thoughts. You'll have wished that you hadn't asked and, by the time you're doing reading this, you'll wonder why you asked.
UW ... there ya go, spillin' the beans again.

>>looking in can<<
Wow, not many beans left! Wait, here's one stuck to the side: The links to the pics can point to html pages containing the full-size pics, imstead of to the pics themselves.

Using html pic pages is something which isn't allowed on most link lists, but which has always worked very well for us. Especially if there's text on the pic pages talking about the specific pics.

Pic pages can either have their own navigation or not. You can make the surfer use their browser's back button to return to the gallery page, or you can give them a link back on the page. You can also give them a link to the next picture page. BUT don't name that link "next" anything. Instead name the link based on what you've named that next pic page (as UW mentioned).

More beans anyone?
__________________
"If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka
Simon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-07-26, 11:33 AM   #3
virgohippy
Madness is like gravity. All it takes is a little... push.
 
virgohippy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
More beans anyone?
Not more beans, no. But I can agree with you on the benefits of using HTML pic pages with little more then a unique title and a single sentence describing the image.

Maybe it's time I figure out which lists allow pic pages and group recips different. I already use pic pages for my personal sites anyway.

Wait, I think I have a bean: What ever happened to putting recips on the "main" page!? |goodidea
__________________
~Warm and Fuzzy.
virgohippy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:18 PM.


Mark Read
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Greenguy Marketing Inc