Forum Moderators: open
Some mention the PR of a site has something to do with it. Others say it's about the content. What do you link to when you link to a quality site, and are you sure it's a quality site?
The above title was inspired by a thoughtful post elsewhere by ken_b. I think it's worthy of it's own thread.
celgins made these excellent points:
...the idea of a "quality site", is relative... From a human perspective...(if humans reviewers actually sat for 30 minutes to review websites)...I would define quality as pertinent, meaningful content; well-written content; aesthetically pleasing website design; high traffic; constant traffic; and ease of use.
What is the criteria you use to define a quality site?
I really like linking to "quality" sites.
For me that means first and foremost a site that offers real value to the people that visit my site. They also need to be up front about who and where they really are.
If a site does that, I'll overlook a LOT of crap. Conversly, the less real value, the less other stuff I'll overlook.
But here's the thing, I'd guess that most of the sites I'm likely to link to are pretty far down the "proffesional" scale. A huge number are built by mom and pop shops that aren't really webmasters, and it shows, sometimes a lot.
A lot of these sites are seldom ever going to be found by average surfers, no matter how much they want or need the products the shop offers. The sites are just not going to rank in the top 100 anytime soon.
In those cases the "real value" also represents the "quality" in my mind.
Beyond that I like to see a site that works the way it apparently should, not under construction, not a lot of broken links, not over loaded with affiliate links, no semi-hidden or off-topic links pages, no made for Adsense sites, no pure affiliate sites. Readability is high on my list, so dark greasy text on a black background is a bad sign.
Shopping carts need to be user friendly for a non-web oriented user.
Pure directory sites are out, as are made for Adsense (etc) and pure affiliate sites, along with most sites asking for a "link exchange"
ll that said, if I was in another niche, well I can easily see my criteria being very different.
For me it's all relative. Generally I also try to focus on linking to a combo of the best by virtue of size/presence and those that I think are gems even if diamonds in the rough.
It's fairly intuitive and there's no checklist, but the generally accepted lists work for me, and if there are not enough items on the list, then I move on. What does that mean. Ummm, I don't need an address or phone, but if there is not one, what eles is there? In that case, professional design and quality of content matter more. And vice versa.
In the end, if I feel that there is a real person, or team, behind the operation...and they care about what's on the site, the odds of my wanting to link increase dramatically.
