Should There Be A New Standard For All FHG TGP/MGP Sites?
Should There Be A New Standard For All Sponsor Hosted Gallery TGP/MGP Sites?
Hmmm, dunno, but it’s an interesting question raised by Tolik on Adult Webmaster Info - and some good points are made there about it.
When I started CJ SITES Adult Traffic Trading Blog it was really because there was no site I could think of which listed the rules of traffic trading adult sites. There used to be one called Jerk O’ Matic but it’s long since gone or been turned into a tgp or something, and because it used frames its a bitch to surf on the waybackmachine.
So is another standard needed? I don’t think so - because most sites listing all sponsor hosted galleries fall under the general TGP or MGP rules anyway. (the only real difference between MGP and TGP rules is that more MGPs require 60% to content whereas a lot of TGPs - but not all, require 50% to content, although some are 60%). What kind of content is not usually mentioned, could be the webmasters’ own galleries, could be submitted galleries or sponsor hosted galleries.
There’s some webmasters who have an attitude that their site is somehow better because they accept public submissions, or partner gallery submits. I won’t ramble on about that now though, because it’s up to them what they list and how they run their sites and what productivity they have. But in my opinion content is content, I don’t think most surfers can tell or care if a gallery is hosted by a sponsor or not. If I list all galleries carrying my referral links it suits me fine, and there’s no gallery cheaters to worry about.
So, I don’t think a new term is necessary to describe sites that list all sponsor hosted galleries. But go read the thread on AWI and make up your own mind. Or leave me a comment here if you like.