Would you like to see a client directory?

[Eric Allione]

I think it would be a great addition to this site if it showcases all the IP.Board communities out there in the primary navigation. It could be arranged by category kind of like Dmoz. This way, clients could examine sites in similar niches to get an idea of what features they may be able to improve upon.

Also, it should be too much extra work for the moderators; clients would just submit their own IPB forums through a simple form and say what category they'd like to be in. It might be hectic at first but the workload would stabilize after a month or so.

There are alread threads out there with this kind of info, but a directory would actually help us to find IPB forums that have similar themes to our own. For example, I personally am running a research forum, so it would be the most helpful for me to see what other research IPB forums are doing as opposed to gaming clan forums.

As a side note, this site has a very high page rank and it would be nice to offer a minor boost to the clients (raising everyone up a small notch). I could even imagine that as being an incentive to come on board with IPB in the first place since VB doesn't offer this. It would be especially helpful for new clients who are facing those notorious SEO obstacles such as Google's sandbox. However, this would still be a nice and helpful feature even if we were only offered nofollow links.

There is enough room on the navigation that this addition wouldn't make it look cluttered. Would anyone else like to see this?

">

[Makoto]

You mean something like this?

http://community.invisionpower.com/files/file/4752-links-directory/

[Nevo]

No... This is a bad idea... People will abuse it.

[Eric Allione]

That links directory mod might work for this, but I think the ability to rate sites should be de-selected.

And how could people possibly abuse it if you can only submit IPB forums? We each buy one license per each forum. Can you please elaborate on any possible abuse? Submissions to a category would need moderator approval of course (to make sure they are actually IPB sites).

Edit: That being said, I think it would also be appropriate to submit IPB forums that don't belong to us (where the owners are now out of touch with the IPS community). I'm not sure about this though if anyone has an opinion on that.

[Makoto]

I honestly think it sounds like a somewhat interesting idea.

It'd be extra staff work and you'd need some solid submission guidelines set up though.

[Rimi]

They used to have one.

[Saiga]

I voted "no" because I wouldn't particularly care for something like that. It wouldn't get any use from me.

I'm sure if the idea went over, the staff here would do an excellent job with it, though.

[Jυra]

Link directories are pretty lame if it's just people spamming links to their own site. It would give nearly no page rank.

[avro]

I voted yes. As this is my first and so far only IPS board I have joined, I would like to see what others are doing with the software.

[Makoto]

Link directories are pretty lame if it's just people spamming links to their own site. It would give nearly no page rank.

It wouldn't be spamming with proper staffing.

[.time]

There used to be one, but it vanished with IP.Links.

[Rhett]

You can make a quick directory using google to find IP.Board. Search for the following using the quotes.

"community forum software by ip.board"

Or CLICK HERE

[Alfa1]

It would make sense to have a categorized list of IPS powered websites and possibly website reviews added to it. Reviews can help webmasters to get feedback and improve their websites.

IMHO not a biggie though.

[• Jay •]

No thanks.

It's presumptuous to assume that every IPS customer would even want their site listed in such a directory.

[Donkerrood]

Would be great for instance to have a list from which you can also see which sites use content / gallery / nexus / etc.

[GreenLinks]

I would prefer IPB dedicating their time on development instead of managing and moderating a link directory.

[Eric Allione]

CLICK HERE

Did you even look at the search results for that?

If a site has a tight niche, then it's hard to find similar types of sites with Google because they won't have enough traffic to be on the top 50 search pages. I tried several different keyword combinations and couldn't find a single philosophy research IPB site.

As far as the point about spamming links, that would not be possible if you can only submit your site once.

Aside from tapping into staff resources which would be a problem at first while it's getting going, I fail to see why it wouldn't be nice to have a master list of IPB sites that would prefer to share themselves in such a directory.

And this request doesn't have to be interpretted as begging for SEO (like I said nofollow links would be fine). So you can rule out low page rank as a reason not to do this.

Some sites are just impossible to find on Google. For example, you could type in IPB philosophy, and go through 5,000 pages, you still would never find my site. That query doesn't seem to produce any forums for that matter. Meanwhile, I've established myself on two dozen social networking sites, and even spent $100+ on Google adwords. Getting listed isn't as easy as it used to be, especially if your niche is a generally low-traffic interest. I even scoured the Dmoz database, nothing on IPB in my niche. Then again some sites looked like they "might" be IPB, but there was no visible copyright info so I couldn't tell. Which is another reason why an IPB directory would help.

[Makoto]

No thanks.

It's presumptuous to assume that every IPS customer would even want their site listed in such a directory.

Then don't submit your site..?

I would prefer IPB dedicating their time on development instead of managing and moderating a link directory.

Assuming it would take a lot of time every day to review the occasional link submission..

[• Jay •]

Then don't submit your site..?

That'd be irrelevant if people were allowed to submit links to sites they didn't personally own and operate.

Besides that, have you even considered the ramifications? There are many categories that would be inappropriate to be posted on the IPS corporate forums, even though the license holders themselves were within the official terms of service in using the product.

Prostitution, for example, is a legal activity in Nevada (outside of Las Vegas), and a site set up for such a company, while being within the product ToS, would be completely inappropriate to be listed on this site.

Pornography is another example.

Gambling (in areas where such activities are legal) is another.

And on top of all that, like it or not it would increase Staff responsibility because they'd have to investigate any time a report was made about links. The more links, the more reports, the more investigations. All for a frivolous list that could be recreated with Google.

While an independent link directory outside of the purview of IPS could be workable, having one here on the company forums would not.

[Makoto]

You are complaining about complete non-issues. I've already explained how a system like that could work if IPS wanted to do it. I do not expect it to be added anyways.

[GreenLinks]

You are complaining about complete non-issues. I've already explained how a system like that could work if IPS wanted to do it. I do not expect it to be added anyways.

So why do you respond nearly everyone who oppose the idea ?

[Rimi]

So why do you respond nearly everyone who oppose the idea ?

:) Because he supports and likes the idea? I also think it's a good idea, but I don't expect IPS to listen. :)

[bfarber]

Because he supports and likes the idea? I also think it's a good idea, but I don't expect IPS to listen.

Funny you say that, considering we've had a public link directory on this site in the past. Twice, if I recall correctly.

[Rimi]

Funny you say that, considering we've had a public link directory on this site in the past. Twice, if I recall correctly.

:) I already said you've had one in the past. That's why I don't expect there to be another one. :)

[Makoto]

I already said you've had one in the past. That's why I don't expect there to be another one.

Basically this. I assumed if it existed in the past and was removed, there was some reason for it.

So why do you respond nearly everyone who oppose the idea ?

I do think it's a pretty cool idea, but just because I'm not sure it'll be added doesn't mean I have to be quiet and let people trash the idea. I'll continue responding to any arguable comments made unless this thread is locked too. Why shouldn't I? Do you contest anything I've said here?