site submission

[jfrovich]

Cool just paid going to be submitting a few sites..

hm.. got stuck

i will pm you my payment info

[WebSavvy]

I'll have to check the PayPal return URL because that shouldn't be active. It was disabled a long time ago. :confused:

We manually send out the PinCodes during our normal business hours M-F 9-5 PM CST, and Sat 11-2 PM CST.

Your PinCode will be sent out to you during those hours first thing tomorrow morning, Jas. :)

[jfrovich]

I'll have to check the PayPal return URL because that shouldn't be active. It was disabled a long time ago. :confused:

We manually send out the PinCodes during our normal business hours M-F 9-5 PM CST, and Sat 11-2 PM CST.

Your PinCode will be sent out to you during those hours first thing tomorrow morning, Jas. :)

good to know

[jfrovich]

What's the difference between
Title: & Text Title.

Don't seem to find an explanation here
http://www.websavvy.cc/submission.rules.htm
Thanks

[WebSavvy]

Title text is the text that's contained in the title attribute of a link.
Here's an example:

<a href="/some-page.htm" title="This is my page">site name</a>

[jfrovich]

Title text is the text that's contained in the title attribute of a link.
Here's an example:

<a href="/some-page.htm" title="This is my page">site name</a>

So title company name
title text :Keyword

[WebSavvy]

Yep, you can switch them whichever way you want to. However, if the site title submitted is different than the actual web page, it will be changed to be the same as the actual web page.

Titles and descriptions are always edited by the editor. This allows us to have accurate and unique content because many site owners submit their site to many directories using the very same titles and descriptions each time.

This in turn causes the directory in question to have content that's not really unique. Besides, it's a human edited directory (i.e., a human will edit it! ;))

[jfrovich]

Thanks i see my site got added here

http://www.websavvy.cc/directory/health.medicine/medical.practitioners/dentists.htm

unfortunately the page is not in Google

well looking into it more the page is
[link to google cache url removed]
but not in the Google cache.

[WebSavvy]

None of our pages are cached in google. We use the no cache tag. That has ZERO to do with the category page being indexed in google's db.

All the cache is -- is a stored local copy of a page on google's server. No SE has the right to store copies of YOUR copyrighted work on their servers without your permission. The cache at google is used by bad bots and they go through that link to hit your site trying to pass themselves off as google.

We went the no cache route when our new design went live. Lots of other members here also use no cache and can tell you as well that it has ZERO to do with whether or not a page is indexed in google's db.

Yes, your site was indexed in the appropriate category given its topic.

:)

[Connie]

Jason pages that are cached provide another source for scrappers to steal your content. Why bother protecting your site from scrappers, and then give it to them in cached pages, and the wayback machine?

[jfrovich]

None of our pages are cached in google. We use the no cache tag. That has ZERO to do with the category page being indexed in google's db.

All the cache is -- is a stored local copy of a page on google's server. No SE has the right to store copies of YOUR copyrighted work on their servers without your permission. The cache at google is used by bad bots and they go through that link to hit your site trying to pass themselves off as google.

We went the no cache route when our new design went live. Lots of other members here also use no cache and can tell you as well that it has ZERO to do with whether or not a page is indexed in google's db.

Yes, your site was indexed in the appropriate category given its topic.

:)

Jason pages that are cached provide another source for scrappers to steal your content. Why bother protecting your site from scrappers, and then give it to them in cached pages, and the wayback machine?

hm..never thought of it that way, do many sites use the no cache?

[WebSavvy]

Yep, a lot of sites do use it. There are major newspaper sites using it, some major shopping/eComm sites -- you name it.

Even webmaster world uses it. They were getting bot scraped to hell and back. So, they ended it by using the no cache tag.

I've been using it several months now and haven't had any more issues with scrapers going through google cache. There were just too many and it degrades server performance which impacts the quality of the user experience for visitors of my site.

[IncrediBILL]

Search engine cache has become such a problem that some webmasters started the NoArchive (http://noarchive.net/) initiative.

Check out some of the eye opening articles in the reference section.

FWIW, I've been using NOARCHIVE for 3 years now.

[Connie]

hm..never thought of it that way, do many sites use the no cache?
I don't know how many sites are using NoArchive. What difference does it make?

I'm sure the number is increasing among those who are concerned with website security because of crusaders like Bill.

I've used NoArchive for about a year on my sites. Adding the NoArchive meta has not affected anything in regard to ranking, or indexing.

Something else I do (it's all Bill's Fault) is show snoopy visitors most robots this:
#for other bots and nosy visitors
User-agent: *
Disallow: /

I show a select few robots a robots.txt file something like this:
User-agent: *
Disallow: /cgi-bin/
Disallow: /bot-trap/
Disallow: /zhoneypot/
Disallow: /img.logos/
Disallow: /img.buttons/

[IncrediBILL]

Something else I do (it's all Bill's Fault) is show snoopy visitors most robots this:
#for other bots and nosy visitors
User-agent: *
Disallow: /


Finally, something i don't mind being blamed for doing.

[Erwin]

Even webmaster world uses it. They were getting bot scraped to hell and back. So, they ended it by using the no cache tag.

Hmm, never tought about the noarchive this way. I'm gonna be busy again, thanks for the tip!

[jfrovich]

good to know
i added noarchive to my main site and also added this to my robots.txt

I think a mod should separate this as it off topic

I don't know how many sites are using NoArchive. What difference does it make?

I'm sure the number is increasing among those who are concerned with website security because of crusaders like Bill.

I've used NoArchive for about a year on my sites. Adding the NoArchive meta has not affected anything in regard to ranking, or indexing.

Something else I do (it's all Bill's Fault) is show snoopy visitors most robots this:
#for other bots and nosy visitors
User-agent: *
Disallow: /

I show a select few robots a robots.txt file something like this:
User-agent: *
Disallow: /cgi-bin/
Disallow: /bot-trap/
Disallow: /zhoneypot/
Disallow: /img.logos/
Disallow: /img.buttons/