Thanks for such a descriptive reply, it was very helpful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
I'm not sure what makes you think this site is designed better than the 'vast majority' of free sites out there, but we don't need to go there  |
Most sites I've seen on LLs look generated, and I guess they probably are. They're just tables within tables and contain only text except for the content. Nothing wrong with that, I just think a graphical layout speaks better about the site I'm promoting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
I see the site is designed for 1024 wide. While that's not a problem with some lists (mine included), I suspect there are still some reviewers hanging on to the 800 wide rule. Definitely something for you to consider while setting up who you want to submit the site to.
|
I don't figure 800x600 users (if they're still around?) will be swayed too heavily by high definition vides that are bigger than their screen. Either way, I've always designed for 1024x768 and higher. If I have trouble submitting, though, I will lower it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
That spammy keywords meta, with irrelevant terms to boot, isn't going to help you. And may in fact cause declines with reviewers who check such things. Here's a thread I did a while back on metas...
Free Site Meta Tags Tips |
Wow. I had no idea meta tags were taken into consideration while reviewing. I honestly didn't think it really mattered at all these days. I've fixed all of my meta tags.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
You 2257 link almost vanishes on mouseover. Probably not an issue that would cause declines, but can't help matters either.
|
Fixed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
As mentioned, most lists allow up to 3 outbound links per page, I'd think of a way to get one more ad on those galleries. Perhaps something about that gigantic image at the top of the pages, which by the way is pretty pixelated and not really doing you any good.
|
I'll probably add a banner or link back to my main site to take advantage of expert traffic, but I'm still deciding.
As for the big pictures, that wasn't pixelation (Unless I've mistaken the reason you said it was). I overlayed the pictures with lines of gradient, because I've seen it done elsewhere and liked the result. I've taken it out of all three of the big pictures, so it shouldn't look pixelated anymore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
If you really want to design something that's better than most of the sites I see, try changing up your metas on every page. Same story with the on page text, change it up on every page. Building unique pages will pay long term dividends  |
Done and done. Meta keyword and meta title are different from page to page, and no page has matching text.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrYum
Other than those issues, the site looks fine. But, it could use some tweaking to really be better than what we see every day |
Other than what you've told me so far, I guess as far as design goes, what tweaking are you referring to? I guess I was mistaken when I assumed the majority of free sites you receive look like the ones I've seen in a lot of LLs: Generic and designless. I figured creating a nice layout (that resembles closely the site I'm promoting's layout) would put me at an advantage.
Thanks again for your review, it was very enlightening