now THAT is hilarious!:)
even the DMOZ editors would laugh!
some people never catch up I guess, oh well
LOL, tell her you use the RDF dump too, and you as well are very happy to be link partners with her.
>>Can anyone beat this?
I was paying a guy $600/year for a few PR5 links. (Hey, the focused referrals were worth it!) Into our second year, he phoned and demanded a recip.
I kindly told him it would not benefit my users to link back from this particular site, to which it did not, and furthermore for $600/year, he should alter his attitude a bit. However, I still offered to GIVE him a link on another more appropriate site. He hung up on me & removed my links.
I replied saying I had been listed, twice, in DMOZ for three years without her help, thank you very much.
the nerve of some people....
Hmmm, funny that it was a 'she' who originally wrote you!
It's probably a (male) member of this board who read the recent thread regarding male/female online personas!
The link requests that really bug me are those that claim a link from their site will bring me lots of traffic and increase my rank. I check out their site and lo and behold they aren't even indexed in google and furthermore have no links, and have a PR of 0. I usually write them back with the facts and tell them when their LINK page PR gets up to equal mine then I'll consider a link exchange.
|tell them when their LINK page PR gets up to equal mine then I'll consider a link exchange. |
I always find these sorts of comments confusing. If everyone refuses to link to PR0 pages, how are those pages to ever get the PR they need to get links? If you have a link page PR of 7, for instance, and you and every other webmaster out there refuse to link to anyone other than another site with a link page PR of 7, that page will never get a link from you (b/c they will never get a PR of 7 on their link page without first getting links from some PR7 sites). You might as well just tell them to go to h*ll.
Wouldn't a better approach be to link to relevant and quality sites, no matter what their PR is? Good, new sites have to start somewhere, too. And not all of them are started by veterans with a pool of established pages to link from. If you have a high PR site, you can certainly judge the quality of a site based on more than it's PR value. Not only does giving them a link help to propogate the existence of quality content on the web, but you also help a good site get it's footing and can benefit down the road from that's site's growing (as opposed to full grown) PR.
I mean, I agree it's pretty foolish to email a successful webmaster with a request for a link to a PR0 page and tell them that their site stands to benefit a lot from the exchange, but it seems a bit callous (and possibly short-sighted) to outright refuse a link exchange based solely on a low PR (despite the fact that this seems to be the prevalent attitude amongst high-PRed site owners).
Hello Create: I link to the best sites I can find in my junk-crowded field.
I do this without regard to page-rank, only for quality of content.
Lorel had a point though, a suggestion for a response to the idiot that wanted to
give a return link via DMOZ. The whole thread had me laughing hard.
Best - Larry
I always find these sorts of comments confusing. If everyone refuses to link to PR0 pages, how are those pages to ever get the PR they need to get links? ....
Wouldn't a better approach be to link to relevant and quality sites, no matter what their PR is?
I do link to PR 0 sites but not when approached by liars misrepresenting their site and it's traffic, and usually there is a problem with their site that tells me it will never rank either--like the links being inside of a frame.
You know the shows that talk about the bank robbers that write the stick up note on the back of their OWN deposit slip.
The should have one called "World's Stupidest Webmasters"
Unfortunately - I have done a few dumb things in my time, but never on PURPOSE
|but not when approached by liars misrepresenting their site and it's traffic |
Okay. I agree with that 100%. :)
A fledgling site's webmaster would do better to outright admit that their site can provide no benefit other than the interest of users (the ultimate reason to link) and a potential PR value in the future. Misrepresenting a site's usefulness to someone who clearly already knows what does and doesn't make a site useful is just plain foolish.