getting listed

[hello]

A colleague of mine has a problem with getting websites listed in the odp directory. The category is for credit cards. The websites are sites with affiliate links on them for other card companies. Now he has been told that the reason for the rejection is beacuse guidlines of no affiliate sites allowed. But the problem is that there are many credit card sites with many affiliate links on them. So whats up with this double standard. The editors have been emailed with no response. I see soemthing verey wrong here. I have noticed myself that these certain sites have been in the directory for a long time and no others aare let in. I wish someone would look into this or else I see a real problem happening. This cannot continue forever. How should this be handled?

[Hunter]

Give us the URL and we can give you the most likely reasons for rejection. If I had to guess without seeing the Site first, I would say that you probably need more unique content because this is the most common oversite by affiliate site web masters.

[sean orourke]

A couple of thoughts:

* The editors might not have viewed ~all~ content before approving/rejecting the other sites (site depth/time constraints).

* Editorial policy might have shifted (tightened up) since the other sites were added, or category editors might have changed.

* The other sites might have changed since submission. You never know what the original editor reviewed. There could have been intentional switcheroos or unintentional sitedeaths (leading to affiliate graveyards).

* Maintaining a directory or guide site is not easy. It just isn't.

Don't worry about being better than the worst sites; worry about being as good as the best sites. You can't go wrong that way.

Edited by: sean_orourke

[hello]

capitalone1.co.uk
platinumcreditcard.com
visalinks.co.uk

we know they have aff links, but so do the other sites listed!

p.s. look at yahoo directory for credit card sites and see how many are listed. then look at dmoz. they reject tons of these affiliate sites, but the sames one are always there. something fishy

[skibum]

After just a quick glance, they look like small sites, completely geared toward pushing people to sign up for credit cards. Any information on those sites is going to be found at the actual sites for the cards themselves.

Possible explanations for similar sites already being in have been provided. Many different affiliate prone categories, magazine subscriptions for one, tend to have older listings that would not make it in by todays guidelines. As they say, the early bird gets the worm. <b>Current</b> guidelines would not lead an editor to list those sites. The categories probably get bombarded with affiliate type sites. The editors there are probably lucky if they see the light of day from the bin of unreviewed.