Info.Vilesilencer penalised?

rainchild · #1 (**permalink**) 03-14-2008, 01:03 AM

It comes no surprise when the so called doyens of this industry start to hop and skip after Google finds cause to tweak their strings. But the transformation across at Info.Vilsilencer is nothing short of startling. Dan the man has done a complete about face. After brazenly sticking his finger up Googles nose he has seen the light and is now preaching hell and damnation for anyone who so much as makes a spelling mistake.

Quote:

After going through the directories that we re-added to the list last update and finding quite a few of them who have some terrible sites listed, we are going to be manually reviewing each sites content, to determine whether an editorial quality guideline is being met.

If we feel that your site is currently listing questionable content, we will list it here so that you are aware of why your site is being removed. Once you've cleaned the content you can ask for a re-review and we will gladly re-add you to the list.

This is a necessary step in increasing the longevity of both this list and the directories that it currently lists.

No arguments there but its bit like trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted and I cant help questioning both his intent as well as his conviction. Why is he so concerned about the description being used in a link? Surely it would make a lot more sense to look at the site itself and to start picking out the ones that really are dodgy. Or would that not serve the interests back at the Culture Club. We all know how slick and well read they are. They have no problem wording their submissions and are the veritable masters of disguise. Is this not just another exercise in smoke and mirrors and a clever ploy to distract everyone's attention from the real issues?

rainchild · #2 (**permalink**) 03-15-2008, 09:03 PM

If anyone is remotely interested, this post was addressed to and it was intended to make a point to the owner of Info.Vilesilencer after he reopened a debate we were having about something that has nothing to do directories.

Quote:

If it really is as bad as you are trying to make out and the aborigines are the child raping, mother beating, no Sunday School bunch of degenerates you would like us to believe; how come you guys made such a hash of it? Could it be attitude by any chance?

And whilst it may be a bit off topic it does illustrate in an oblique sort of way that these sort of things shouldn't always be taken at face value. If you are looking for answers in this industry you have to learn to read between the lines and to look behind the curtain because the only thing you can be sure of is that the advice you get is not free.

I wonder who is behind the makeover at IVS? Who is footing all the bills? How does this affect their policy? What is Dan's interest in this industry? My bet is that besides link submission services he has spent a bit of time dabbling with Adsense revenues.

rainchild · #3 (**permalink**) 03-15-2008, 10:50 PM

He has got his PR back. Its interesting to see how quickly Google responds in some instances. Was it just a temporary glitch or recognition of the fact that they recognised that he recognised the need to execute a one hundred and eighty degree about face and the fact that he removed those offensive banners?

edit: info.vilesilencer.com/forum/index.php shows no PR whereas if you search on info.vilesilencer.com/forum the page diplays PR2

As a matter of interest I loooked up one of the directories he used to run and man, did he crow about it at the time. I wonder what happened. Its dead in the water now. What a waste of time that was. Why on earth did I ever bother submitting my sites? It was a complete waste of some very valuable time.

And that I think is the bottom line in this game. Time in time will reveal all.

rainchild · #4 (**permalink**) 05-31-2008, 07:55 AM

Monthly updates have become quarterly and at last count there were twenty nine additions to the General list. Of that nine are unusable. The owner has gone bad, the lists are stale and I guess its time to look for a resource thats a tad more reliable.

TC · #5 (**permalink**) 05-31-2008, 09:42 AM

Dude,
as I said long ago......the site, the "list" and everything associated with it is a thing of the past. Just like useless directories and directory scripts. People are clinging to the last threads of a DEAD dream.

Time, money, and efforts are better spent on other things in life....unless your one of the many crooks profiting from the suckers who buy into and believe the directory story that is/has been pushed and preached for so long.

Wake up people...

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainchild

Monthly updates have become quarterly and at last count there were twenty nine additions to the General list. Of that nine are unusable. The owner has gone bad, the lists are stale and I guess its time to look for a resource thats a tad more reliable.

rainchild · #6 (**permalink**) 05-31-2008, 10:16 PM

Long term you might well be right but what are you saying? Is Google going to drop back links as an input to the serp's or our directories as a source of back links? What about blogs? What about articles? How are we going to manipulate and fiddle the results that are so important to so many?

In my mind this all comes down to attitude and recognising that what is bad for the search results, is bad for Google and it is bad for each and everyone of us. And this is where Vilesilencer loses it. His attitude is all about "appearances". In other words he believes you have to make it look good to appear to be good. Whereas I believe in the natural look, transparency and above all else accountability.

I was never able to figure him out or where his interests in the Directory industry lie. And the only conclusion I can come to is that traffic was his motive. I believe that Vilesilencer is a vehicle being used to front a high class prostitution ring that specialises in churning out "quality" adsense spam or "informational" sites. He has mastered the art of double speak and ducks and dives with the best of them. But I am certain that if I am not dead on target that I am close.

He believes that he is in partnership with Google, that they are driven by profit to the exclusion of all else. And was he pissed off when they torpedoed the adsense racketeers? Yes, Google has cornered the online advertising market but no they are not as stupid as to believe that sterile informational sites touting outdated content as a lure and teaser for adsense traffic, is going to do them any good in the long run. No it doesn't matter how good the window dressing is. Bad is bad. Links litter and Informational sites are bad for the search results. Period.

No it is not directories which are in trouble, its directories or sites that list the spam churned out and promoted by Dan and his cronies. Leastways I hope that's the story. I have invested a lot of time and effort in the sites I have been working on.

alexme · #7 (**permalink**) 06-24-2008, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainchild

Long term you might well be right but what are you saying? Is Google going to drop back links as an input to the serp's or our directories as a source of back links? What about blogs? What about articles? How are we going to manipulate and fiddle the results that are so important to so many?

In my mind this all comes down to attitude and recognising that what is bad for the search results, is bad for Google and it is bad for each and everyone of us. And this is where Vilesilencer loses it. His attitude is all about "appearances". In other words he believes you have to make it look good to appear to be good. Whereas I believe in the natural look, transparency and above all else accountability.

I was never able to figure him out or where his interests in the Directory industry lie. And the only conclusion I can come to is that traffic was his motive. I believe that Vilesilencer is a vehicle being used to front a high class prostitution ring that specialises in churning out "quality" adsense spam or "informational" sites. He has mastered the art of double speak and ducks and dives with the best of them. But I am certain that if I am not dead on target that I am close.

He believes that he is in partnership with Google, that they are driven by profit to the exclusion of all else. And was he pissed off when they torpedoed the adsense racketeers? Yes, Google has cornered the online advertising market but no they are not as stupid as to believe that sterile informational sites touting outdated content as a lure and teaser for adsense traffic, is going to do them any good in the long run. No it doesn't matter how good the window dressing is. Bad is bad. Links litter and Informational sites are bad for the search results. Period.

No it is not directories which are in trouble, its directories or sites that list the spam churned out and promoted by Dan and his cronies. Leastways I hope that's the story. I have invested a lot of time and effort in the sites I have been working on.

I think Dan provides a good service with his efforts of his directory lists...

"His attitude is all about "appearances". In other words he believes you have to make it look good to appear to be good. Whereas I believe in the natural look, transparency and above all else accountability."

I don't understand what you mean with this. It is not appearances that he is after, he clearly states that directories need to have for example, good editing skills and not just accept everything which to me shows accountability and a natural look. Heck, if he supported the people that have directories that accepts submission with keyword spamming etc then what would be the difference to calling directories Link Farms. But he is not supporting that at all.

And sure Dan makes money from his site, if he didn't how would he be able to do what he does? As I expect this website would do as well?

I don't understand your issues with Dan and IVS...

rainchild · #8 (**permalink**) 06-24-2008, 10:29 PM

Dan is inconsistent in that he has very strong principals when it suits him but he will turn a blind eye to the sort of stuff that will kill this industry. Despite spending a few years on the site I never managed to work out where his interests lie. He shies away from things like transparency and more importantly accountability and gets decidedly nervous and bad tempered when one starts looking too closely at the content and purpose of sites he promotes as quality.

My guess is that he is or was involved in mass producing professionally designed informational sites that are monetized using Google Adsense. Or in everyday speak MFA

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexme

I think Dan provides a good service with his efforts of his directory lists...

Dan lost it just before the purge. If I am not mistaken Google whacked the adsense spammers and then turned their attention to PR and link selling. IVS has never been the same since. Monthly updates take three months and his content is as a result stale and incomplete.

karmadir · #9 (**permalink**) 07-01-2008, 12:13 PM

They have to maintain quality of their website that's why they are becoming strict.

rainchild · #10 (**permalink**) 07-01-2008, 09:48 PM

Doesn't make any sense. One day he displays free banner adverts for Bid directories and sites that are openly selling PR and the next he culls half his list because the editors cant spell in English. Just doesn't add up. He is evasive, a master of double speak and he is looking after his interests, which is what is in question.

If he was serious about "cleaning up" the directory industry he would start taking a look at the sort of sites directories are listing. But that takes us a little too close to home for him.

He is an accomplished salesman and I suspect he is or was an adsense spammer. Most free directories are a short term resource.One is never going to get away from that and the best we can do is to try and ensure that directory masters can spot the dross. What we want to do is to draw lines in the sand and make a distinction between spam and links litter on the one side and user friendly content on the other. Who cares whether its spelt right or not.