Quote:
Originally Posted by LPA
I have been dubious about directories for a long time because they serve no real purpose. I never look in web directories and my guess is very few people do. With that in mind surely Google has them lined up in the periscope to sink them unless there is a reason not to, as mentioned in the previous post, which is good content.
|
replace the word
directories with
websites, and I agree with you.
Quote:
|
Without content directories are really quite a pointless exercise in the real world but they will exist as long as there is some SEO benefit attached I suppose.
|
without content, any website on the internet is pointless. e.g. A blog that has little content, out of date content, or uninformed content is also pointless. A forum, that has no members contributing, or just a long list of old discussions (content) is also pointless.
An online shop who have very few products or nothing in stock is also pointless.
Anything is pointless if it isn't run well. I think it's ignorant to say Google should line directories up in a periscope and sink them. It's tantamount to singling out a minority in real life and making generalisations about them encouraging their demise.
Some of the best websites on the internet are directories. Whether you think about it in broad terms of wikis (not just the general Wikipedia, but the multitude of subsets created on specific topics) or more specifically link-prominent or submission-prominent web directories like DMOZ, JoeAnt, Skaffe, etc. There's no denying they represent some of the best websites on the internet, but --- that's because they all have great content
