| 3:16 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|tell me that ain't cheesey. |
It sounds like it. Report it at the abuse reporting place. If there is really something wrong, it will be dealt with.
| 3:26 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I did report it. The answer when I checked back with the number was that it was resolved. That made everything cheesier for me. They are still listed the same way. So, if you are a webmaster and seo firm then always subnit to the odp this way and you can get listed over and over in the odp.
| 4:23 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
In your report, did you mention that clicking on "home" went to the other domain?
This post is the first time you've mentioned that in this thread, and it's the ONLY thing you've mentioned that would tend to give a cheddar flavor to the whole situation.
Everything else is innocuous. A business site doesn't become ineligible for listing simply because they didn't pay for a separate domain name. Setting up the website on someone else's domain is a standard practice: i.e., Ruby Lane, which hosts all kind of antique and craft stores under one domain.
| 5:05 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I did state that pressing home does make it revert to the solitary domain. I was very thorough. But it seems even cursory review would have revealed this.
| 5:08 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
And it isn't set up on someone else's domain. In fact a check in "whois" gives completely different registration.
| 6:11 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|That made everything cheesier for me. They are still listed the same way |
Maybe what you perceived as a problem was not really a problem. Unfortunatly forum rules do not allow details or specifics for anyone to check it out from here.
| 6:47 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Well, gee, I guess maybe it's not a problem. Just my imagination. So, from now everybody, all you seo's out there...new way to get multiple listings in the odp.
| 7:42 am on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|So, from now everybody, all you seo's out there...new way to get multiple listings in the odp. |
You've always struck me as a reasonable guy (from your posts here and at the Dmoz public forums) but now you are being just a tad unresonable, I think. If what you say up there were the case, it would be a problem as far as the ODP is concerned. If you are convinced that the abuse report wasn't handled correctly, submit another one. What you do whenever you submit an abuse report is that you call upon the attention of a whole group of people with very varying backgrounds, tempers and dispositions; you'll have several people who are all devoted to the cause of removing spammy entries from the directory looking into it.
| 4:16 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Nea, I am a reasonable guy, usually. But, I don't like it when someone tells me "perhaps it isn't a problem" and maybe I am just imagining things. So...I made the statement I did. And it brought the reaction I assumed it would. I assume I am correct that you wouldn't want to start listing all of these seo/client relationships. However, since I was told that, I decided to do some more investigating on my own and I found so far that another web/seo company also has multiple listings this way. the two companies share the sheets in a lot of ways. One led me to the other. And imho, it's even more blatant. You have this company listed. odp has one of their internal news clippings listed? Oh, come on! They have a listing for an obscure hobby. Follow that one out and sure, the hobby is there on the page, but if you hit to get out into a subsection and then go back home, it again dissolves into a seperate domain. And it is now a gaming sight. lol..this is too much. And there is no way back to the hobby sight. Another link is to a news/opinion article that when you click on home, it again resolves to the home address without the seo company url. Now, I want to know. The two seo/web companies that happened to be able to do all this...was it just one editor in all these categories? Does the odp not see a problem?
| 4:22 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I had never made a complaint report on abuse before. I copied the report number and just to test it out, I entered it about 40 minutes later. I was informed that it had already been resolved. So, it came to the attention of a group in 40 minutes?
|Watcher of the Skies|
| 5:45 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
texas, texas, texas - you can see the problem, they're all here around you - the only ones here are EXTREME die-hard ODP apologists and bashers (go bashers!) - they're spinning and whining and, at last resort, saying that perhaps what you have isn't really a problem - a couple here (i won't mention their names) seem to do nothing else but defend ODP's warped, dying system of ill-informed, misguided premises - this isn't the place to hash it out, you're just giving them something to do - you have ZERO need for ODP, let it go
| 6:00 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I see that this situation is upsetting a lot of people. But ... from a SURFER's perspective I don't see any problem, not any problem at all, based on the descriptions.
As I understand it (and I may be missing something here) John runs a website development business, with at sebsite at john-doe.com ; he develops a website for Richard's termite spraying company, which can be accessed through john-doe.com/richard-roe/ and also through richard-roe.com .
The ODP editor chose to list richard's website as john-doe.com/richard-roe/ , although the "home" link on that page goes to richard-roe.com .
Nobody has actually described HOW John set up the domain name -- that is, whether it actually fully resolves to his own server, or whether it goes through some level of indirection.
Does that capture the situation?
If so, it may be (I don't know the URLs but don't mind checking) that the fact that was not specified is the only fact that matters. If richard-roe.com is using meta redirection or hidden frames or the like to go back to the john-doe.com subdirectory, then of course the ODP listing is as it should be. But ... nobody even looked at that before spreading the news that the sky is falling?
The sky may be falling. I don't know. Nobody can possibly know, based on your knowledge insofar as you have so far divulged it and I have so far comprehended it.
What's the rest of the story?
| 6:40 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"The ODP editor chose to list richard's website as john-doe.com/richard-roe/ , although the "home" link on that page goes to richard-roe.com ."
Why in the world would an editor would an editor want to list the seo company/client when the client has his own url? Except to give the seo company another listing in the odp.
"Nobody has actually described HOW John set up the domain name -- that is, whether it actually fully resolves to his own server, or whether it goes through
some level of indirection."
It resolves to another server according to whois. A company that led me to the other listings in the odp listed the same way. They are also receiving multiple listings thru the clients. And they are the ones with the scam site leading to the game page with no way back. And also listed twice under their own name, one for the company and one for the subpage describing one service for their company.
Now, maybe I didn't make this clear. I made this report just a few days ago. Don't you have logs for this? Why is it that no editor has pursued this on your end. You keep saying that from my information nothing can be done. Has anyone thought about checking the logs? Seems that would be a good use of time instead of the response I am getting here. All the tools I used to find this information and more are available to the editors.
People are getting upset? I don't know. No one here is expressing that. Maybe in the odp? Penguin cafe?
If that really is the attitude that the editor can choose to list the seo company/client then again I say to the seo's...submit your clients this way. You will get multiple listings in the odp.
Earlier it was described as a taint of "cheddar" and now it's editor's choice.
| 7:41 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just one more thing Hutcheson...this is a direct quote from you..on resource zone..dealing with most of this issue:
"As for redirecting names -- they are useful for webmasters, we understand. But having a "real URL" is useful for ODP maintenance. We won't tell you where or whether to use redirecting names -- but we don't want to deal with them"
| 8:00 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Correct. If A redirects(*) to B then we will list B.
(* a "redirect" being a meta refresh, 301 redirect, or 302 redirect to B, or even a framed enclosure of B)
[edited by: g1smd at 8:16 pm (utc) on June 29, 2005]
| 8:04 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
But you don't.
| 9:26 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What kind of indirection is involved in this particular example?
| 9:43 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
You're completely missing the point that people have been making here. The fact that the home page link on a site goes to client1.com is meaningless if client1.com is just a frame over abc.com/client1 and every other link on the site still goes to abc.com/client1/.
|The ODP editor chose to list richard's website as john-doe.com/richard-roe/ , although the "home" link on that page goes to richard-roe.com . |
Why in the world would an editor want to list the seo company/client when the client has his own url?
A domain that is a frame over another URL (the "real" URL) will generally resolve to a different server according to whois. Doesn't mean we should be listing that domain.
|Nobody has actually described HOW John set up the domain name -- that is, whether it actually fully resolves to his own server, or whether it goes through some level of indirection. |
It resolves to another server according to whois.
| 10:00 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
| 11:16 pm on Jun 29, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Would you be good enough to explain why my home page in my profile has not changed whatsoever in the year I have been looking?
You guessed it - I submitted mysite there a year ago. Mysite has not been reviewed and not a single link in that whole section has changed in over a year. This industry is huge in the internet. The sites in this OPD section are completely useless and irrelevant for web surfers.
Perhaps you, or one of your editor colleagues, can explain this - or perhaps you can just admit that the OPD is not working theses days.
PS, I am not winging or Directory bashing – this is a legitimate problem that I humbly submit to you, just like I humbly submit mysite and humbly apply for editorship.
| 12:38 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Would you be good enough to explain why my home page in my profile has not changed whatsoever in the year I have been looking? |
That category was updated 3 April 2005 - thats not a year ago.
| 12:53 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|That category was updated 3 April 2005 - thats not a year ago. |
That's a worry! I mean, have a quick look in google or msn to see some of the sites in that indusrty. How could you honestly call the ODP a 'resource'?
| 2:49 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Can't believe people still take DMOZ seriously.
DMOZ is a community. A community of good and bad editors who volunteer their time for different reasons. DMOZ doesn't owe sites anything, and they've proven that. They don't have to review your submission, they don't have to add your site.
I think people need to stop taking DMOZ so serious. Most search engines have :-)
| 6:27 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>Would you be good enough to explain why my home page in my profile has not changed whatsoever in the year I have been looking?
Let's say, I don't have that information, but I would like to answer the question. Since I do have access to other editors, how (in your perception of the ODP) would it be possible for me to go about collecting that information?
| 2:44 pm on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just wanted to add one more thing...somehow the first company I was talking about managed to get themselves listed as mycompany.com/client but also as client.com..imagine...looks like the odp is embracing the seo's...and they said they aren't a webmaster listing service. I guess you just have to be the right seo firm.
| 2:50 pm on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Submit an update request for that immediately. That will be taken care of. The vanity domain will be zapped from the listings. Submit the update against the .com listing. Mention both URLs in the update request.
| 3:04 pm on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Why wasn't that looked at before? g1? I reported the vanity(?). I reported the whole thing. I didn't report it as a double listing. Shouldn't have had to. The report I made was brushed over extremely quick. These techniques have gotten these two seo companies a total of nine listings when they shouldn't have had but 2. Not only do you have all this info already but supposedly it has been addressed twice. Like I said...velveeta...limberger. Let's see nine listings times the 400+ mirror listings...gee...3600+ backlinks..wow!
| 6:06 pm on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Man.. that was a lot to read through.. spent the last few days going over every post and still can not come to a conclusion other than...
There are people that dont like what the ODP is doing... there are people that like what the ODP is doing and neither agree who is right... then there are people that just seem to chime in to either defend or complain about the ODP with no actual facts other than what they perceive to be the truth...
As in all things there will be problems... every company has their issues whether it be a paid employee or volunteers, someone is going to do something that will ultimately hurt the reputation of the company... of course on the flip side, there will be successes, people that overachieve and do nothing but good things.
What I have learned from this, if it upsets you that much then do something to change it, and not just complain to someone, actually apply to be an editor, I applied a few months ago and was accepted without too much trouble at all. I like what the ODP does, I like what it is trying to achieve... Of course there are problems, some of which are more difficult to resolve than just dropping the directory or replacing a few editors.
You do have to understand a few things
1. The directory is a service not a tool of exploitation.
2. It is run by volunteers, some good some have their own agendas, most have the interest of the ODP in mind.
3. All the volunteers have many other things to worry about and spend as much time as we can on the project but that isnt always ideal for people trying to make money or even draw interest to their website, we are doing the best we can with the resources we have, so sorry.. if you can contribute more than please apply.
4. As the world grows, and the technology increases and more and more people use the internet, more and more websites will be contributed and therefore many good sites get lost in the endless clutter of bad sites.. and there are a lot of bad sites out there.
5. The categories that most people complain about are the categories that most people want listed to, so if their are several thousand listed sites in one particular category and 100-200 in each subcategory and only a handful of editors what do we do when a handful of people hate mail us, we defend our work since the other thousand sites have no complaints... some people get upset when they receive hate mail and take it personally, I cant really blame them... many are working really hard to improve the directory.
6. Why use the ODP if you feel the way that you do, I heard one person say that it contributes nothing to the web, so then why even bother, there are many people that use the directory and like it... its not that we dont care, its that we do the best we can, no its not failing, its a lot of work, and many people are happy about what goes on. Please by all means use Google instead, nobody is profiting from this resource, there is no advertising revenue that can fund the big servers that is needed for a resource like google.
7. The resources available to editors is incredible, I have been part of the directory for a few months and I have been treated with complete respect, and everyone is extremely helpful from what I have seen... sure like I said there are always going to be the bad ones, but we cant always weed those out.
8. Just an FYI, I am affiliated with 9 different websites, am a member on countless more and only one has made it into the directory, while I would like my sites to be listed, I did not join to add my own sites.. I am sure that this happens, and hopefully we can catch this, it is not the norm.
You dont have to agree with me, just think about what I have said, I am not defending the ODP against all the accusations that I have read, just adding my feelings about why I think it is a good thing.
| 11:10 pm on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I spent a while reading what you wrote and I come to one conclusion. It's a statement of:
1.let's love it for what it is.-well I am sorry but I find it hard to love an object full of so many flaws. The odp closets itself behind a wall that no one but an editor can penetrate.
2. join and change it. Sorry, but what chance would I have of changing anything when obviously your higher ups have all the power, will not change anything.
3.I don't know about hate mail. I do know that editors cruise thru every forum on the internet that produces a subject on the odp and pounces, belittles and criticizes anyone that dares to bring up salient points about it. They don't really want discussion or education. They just want it to stop.
Use google instead? That is not the point. Using the odp as a "reference" is free. It produces tons of backlinks and exposure. If you work with limited resources it becomes extremely vital to be in it. Hence, the frustration when you depend on a resource that actually spurns you for talking to them.
4. You can't always weed out the bad ones? It should be job one.
5. I see the odp as having one of the biggest public relations problems of any website on the internet. I see the odp as a cloistered community of secret sharers. All true explanation of the inner workings is hidden behind the rationalization that "spammers" may use this against them. You never hear of editors being caught for wrongdoing or of any measures being taken to correct anything internally. The odp is about as "open" as North Korea.
6. If I don't like it, why don't I just go away? Because my clients competitors are listed. It gives them an incredible advantage. (and no, they are not the subject of my complaints). Several of them are listed. In fact in this category, it's what they all share in common. Almost all of their backlinks are identical and spawned from the odp. I, on the other hand will spend an estimated 250 hours trying to accomplish the same number of backlinks by hand. And they lead heavily in google because of only this.
8. Finally, all of the odp's problems could be cured if they did not license their directory to everyone on the internet. What is the purpose of this? It is the internet. Any surfer, anywhere can come to dmoz and use it. So, it is not for the benefit of the surfer. It is because the odp likes being the 500 pound gorilla. It is pure vanity and power. And that is what brings the hate mail from the unincluded.
I have only been scorned by odp editors for bringing this up. I was told it didn't fit the "business model" for the odp. And then I was told it is "an academic project".
I feel like Nick Nolte in North Dallas Forty when he was talking to the coach..."when I call it a business, you call it a game and when I call it a game, you call it a business". I am sure I'll have someone focusing just on that instead of the whole comment.
If the odp doesn't want problems? shed some of that 500 pound gorilla attitude.
One more thing. I have a friend that has 23 clients with listings in the odp. He was wondering if he could use the update url tool to change them all to hiscompany.com/client? He's love to have that many odp hits.
| 11:56 pm on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Of course I did not say that it wasnt without flaws.. and I am still a new comer in the organizations but what I have seen so far is not what people seem to actually think happens.... people are always trying to improve, and are making suggestions, every time I ask a question in the odp forums I get a good timely response.
I joined and am happy with the result, I had no problem joining and it seems there are new editors added everyday so I am not sure how it can be considered a closed community... also the higher ups are all seeking suggestions and opinions...
I do agree with you that the ODP editors seem to react quickly and fiercely but many people are also quick to criticize what they dont understand...
These types of roundtable discussions are important but you do have to remember that no matter how we feel there are others that may not feel the same way... that was the real point of my post.
| 1:31 am on Jul 2, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"I do agree with you that the ODP editors seem to react quickly and fiercely but many people are also quick to criticize what they dont understand... "
Maybe you are right. And the reason people don't understand is because the odp remains "closed" to any information about the true workings. They give you no reaqson for anything that they do. Everything is at the whim of an editor. And "apparent" corruption and favoritism do not get changed. And nothing ever will change because...it wants to be the 500 pound gorilla. Change it. Then people will truly just submit and forget. Then it will be just one more backlink.