everybody has to learn. Please comment on this site.
 

Well, I don't consider myself a newbie, but for sure I am not one of the top wm's here. So, as Mr. Yum suggested me please comment on this FS and tell me how to improve it:
lesbian free site. But being beggining of the week, please don't be too hard on me. Thanks :)
Sadman

Way too hard to get to galleries, you need to make a more prominent link to Gallery 1 and Gallery 2.

As a word of advice, tricking surfers into clicking anywhere doesn't work well at all. Yes, you'll get more first page hits, but they're unlikely to sign up...and there's only so many times you can frustrate a user before they leave you completely.

Put yourself into the mindset of the porn conniseur. You just came to a site looking for free porn. If you're looking for that free porn and you're forced to go to a paysite, it doesn't make you want to buy, it just makes you want to turn off the browser or go to another site.

There are people that would disagree, however. Still, you won't get listed with such links to galleries. (I think)

You should get a title up on your index page.

Personally I hate it when the rollover effects make the page jump around.

I don't think your gallery links are too small, they're just not clearly enough marked as gallery links.

The central banner on gallery 1 is blind.

The "links to many lesbian xxx sites" has a couple of pops that confused me for a second. If you're sending people to a free hub send them straight to it.

A .org domain isn't meant for porn.

(Unless you have changed them) I have to disagree. IMO both gallery links are fine and clearly marked (definately not blind) - just becouse you dont have big fat ass 'GALLERY 1' & 'GALLERY 2' links doesnt mean you trick surferts.

I see two problems though
1) link on gallery 2 'click here to watch exclusive lesbian sex movies!' is blind - add a paysite's name to the link and you shouldnt have any problems
2) I guess yours site name is 'teen scandinavian lesbians kissing and licking' - not all but most LL allow only 3-4 words in title

also.. (I dont mean this site) please remember not to overdo with sponsor's templates - sure you can use some predefined logos and so on but copying whole gallery page and using it as your onw wont bring any good

Those links that make the page jump around are definitally a turnoff like Lemmy mentioned.
And isn't it "Scandinavian teen lesbians" instead of "teen scandinavian lesbians"? But what the hell do I know, I'm just a silly non-english speaking european :)

You are correct.

Those gallery links don't seem difficult to find. My biggest qualm is all of the linked text (not to mention the larger font size for a:hover). You should only link a few words. Larger blocks of linked text are ugly and people accidently click shit that they didn't intend on clicking.

Hi Sadman |waves|

Glad you took that advice in the spirit in which it was given :)

Looks like some others have hit on a few of the points...I'll elaborate as to why I suggested you post it here...

Index page...

Yea, the site title is a bit confusing on the page...but I would have let that slide.

The font size change on hover is indeed annoying. If you catch that bad sucker at the edge and get it going...could damn near give ya a seizure |loony|

Main page...

That's a whole lot of linked text...especially when combined with the wrap around image that's all linked to the sponsor. Way too easy to mis-click and end up on the tour when not intended. I say this because that's what I did...clicked barely to the right of the gallery two link and ended up on the tour.

I see you've got a different font size on hover for the gallery links too. But, it's not such a HUGE difference here so it's no big deal (to me anyway).

Gallery one...

I'm getting a slight side scroll on this page at 800 wide. Had the rest of the site been ok, I probably would have ignored it.

There's the BIG change in font size on hover again.

This may just be me, but those banners that flash "Click Here for Free Movies" are deceptive imo. Yes, they do have some free CLIPS on the tour...but surfers sure as hell don't get Free Movies.

Gallery two...

The whole ad in the middle of this page is borderline blind. The part that actually has the paysite name isn't linked. Yet, the part that's a big picture of two girls kissing IS linked. The text at the bottom of that ad is also borderline. Yea, it's right below the paysite name...but it's not attached to it. And again, the paysite name itself isn't linked.

That's about all I got :D


Why do so many paysites give affiliates pictures of two pornsluts posing with each other and call them lesbians???

I see no pussy fingering...not tongues in pussies. In the very last pic, they actually kiss...woohoo...lesbos! NOT! If one girl slipped and actually touched the others pussy with her tongue, she'd probably race off to the bathroom to grab some listerine |banghead|


That last part wasn't really directed at you Sadman, I see it all the time...just needed to vent :D

Anyway, hope this helps with your future free sites |thumb

The url's end up being so long, guess thats just a personal peeve. Far as I could see most if not all of the graphics on the galleries was linked, making for some big, if not too big ads?

ronnie

Thanks to everybody for comments and suggestion. I have to admit that I overdid the advertisement, it happens when I have a bad converting month |yawn|.
I did make changes as follows:
Index:
- added a small title, in the initial design the top jpg with alt was intended as title.
- took out the bold on hover everywehere, I kept the color change, I hope its fine.
Main page:
- I reduced the linked text, decreased the font size too, probably this will make the gallery links easier to identify, although I agree again with Useless Warrior :D
First Gallery:
-reduced the table size, in my browser did look fine on 800 resolution before, now should be ok.
- no font size hover anymore
- changed the blind banner with text (these guys from Niched Sites should design some banners |banghead|
Second gallery:
-removed the blind design with more defensive banners.
If you are still in the mood, please visit again and you can be harder this time, as it is already Monday evening :D. But if you decide to list it just let me know to add your recip :D

Fonz: thanks, English is my second language too, but looks like your second is better than mine:). I have to get rit of such mistakes...

For that, MrYum, I am the one to (possibly|confused|) blame, not the sponsor. I did select the pics... Although I am doing hardcore free sites too, I still think that if the surfer wants to see fingers and penetration, at least he has to be incited to pay a louzy buck for it... If he is doing that clicking a link which I get credit for, its even better |thumb . But I do see your point.

Thanks again to everybody.|waves|
Sadman

Ah cool...round two :D

Index page looks much better...but be careful about how many words of the title you use when submitting. Some sites will only accept 3 or 4...check their rules as you submit to be sure. Myself, I'm fine with 4 to 6 word titles.

Looks so much better without that link changing sizes. Only thing I would say is the color of your sponsor link now blends into the background on hover. Not something I'd decline a site for, but may impact your clickthroughs.

On the main page, I still find having all that image linked to the sponsor creates a blind link. And is it just me, or is there an image toolbar in the middle of that pic??? If you unlinked the bottom right slice and left just the top slice linked, you'd solve the issue.

Strange, I still get a very slight side scroll on that first gallery. Again, if the rest of the site were clean...I'd let that small of a scroll slide.

No blind links at all on the second gallery now, but a pretty noticable side scroll...much more than gallery one.

On the mini-rant thing, that really wasn't directed at you Sadman. It was more of a general wtf...lol. I would imagine that this is the content the sponsor put up to promote the site...even though you picked it. And of course, I agree that surfers should have to pay to get the good stuff. Perhaps it's because I see so much porn...but it's just so clear that these chicks are not lesbians, but instead pornsluts posing.

Anyway, back to your site. It's definitely much better, but could use just a little more tweaking |thumb

you know sadman I seen some of your sites on my LL admin and cant remember if or how many I listed but I like a person who tries and listens to others for there oppinion and it looks like you got some good advice there from some of the nice members of greenguy and jim clan...

I didnt even look at your site but if your not getting listed or having sales problems then your on the right track|thumb

I do see that toolbar image thing on the main page and I really don't understand why. I even took out the link and is still there with in the head and not other jpg's has that |banghead|. Please enlight me if you can |confused| ...
Thanks MrYoum and I;ll be ready tomorrow evening for the third round. Hoefully the one with k.o. :D
Sadman

|jester| That's awesome! I've never seen that before. Check this out: http://www.sexlesbian.org/teen-scand...affairs-04.jpg
It's part of the actual image.

As for the gallery 1 sidescroll, I don't have the answer, but what I do know is that I can get different page sizes sometimes in IE then I get in Firefox. And Firefox is what MrYum reviews on, so it worth testing in that browser. But what I don't get is why make the two galleries have different colored tables?

That toolbar issue is solved now, my own mistake in photosop |banghead|. Still, I can't reproduce the scroll on any of the galleries using either IE or Forefox. Can you check that again, please ?
Plateman: thanks for your wise words :). Your LL was once on my submission list and I'll add it again to give you some more fun:D
Sadman

Looks much better Sadman |thumb

The only side scroll I'm seeing now is on gallery one and it's very very slight;

Here's a screen grab

Actually, it's so miniscule...as a reviewer, I'd ignore it :)

I do agree with Preacher that the different colored galleries are a bit odd. But, as far as being listable...I'd list the site as it stands now |thumb

Great.|bananna| I'll re-submitted now :D :D :D
Regarding the color of the tables, it is probably one good advice that the ppl can take from this thread: don't start designing with fancy backgrounds (gradients and such) before checking if the sponsor you intend to use actually has banners in portfolio matching your background |badidea|.
Thanks everybody for help. I really appreciate it.
Sadman