No-names, tell your story on how you got PR coverage
anigbrowl: I'll tell you two things that are wrong with your site for free. You allow people to shop together. In general, men compete to display their technical knowledge about things in which they are interested, but don't shop socially. I like sharing my knowledge with friends, but not with strangers or I'd pursue a career in retail. I tend to note things and hunt for them later. Mrs Browl likes to know what her favorite suppliers have on offer and forages about until she finds something that interests her. They're equally valid but quite different selection strategies.Women love shopping together (frequently without any impulse to buy) because they learn about their friends by seeing what they are interested in. So I think your business model is much more interesting to women shopping for clothes than men shopping for digital cameras. If you buy into this idea, then your target market is female friends separated by geography, not men who would be equally happy working at Best Buy.Now, your 'big elephant leading little elephant' logo reinforces your site title 'browseology', which is presumably the study of how to successfully browse Amazon  for shopping purposes. For men, you're putting them in an inferior position, implying they have less knowledge and bruising tender egos by suggesting they lack browseology skills. For women, you're suggesting that they are elephant friends. Women like elephants, but they don't want to identify with them.The idea and the technology both have merit. But the social contract you present to potential customers is a double fail. So: rebrand. You could do worse than grab a few co-workers, load up on weed and beer, and lock yourselves in a room for the weekend with a TV that tunes only to Bravo and TLC, to immerse yourselves in gender stereotypes.