Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

DMOZ's ex-editors list

How does one get their sites removed from the list

         

allanp73

9:28 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I was once an editor for DMOZ and was removed when I added one of my sites to the category I edited. It was a small category and I felt that my site was relevant. However, I admit I gave it a too good description and abused my editor power.
Later I found out from an editor friend that my sites not just the offending site were added to an ex-editor list. This list makes it very hard for other editors to add my sites to relavent categories. The removal of my sites from DMOZ effected the more than 200 people who are supported by my sites.
Several months later, I started a new business as a webmaster for a real estate web company. Being a fan of DMOZ I submitted the real estate sites to DMOZ. I made sure that the sites were relevant and of high content quality. One editor saw that I was the register of some of the sites and immediately added these new sites to my ex-editor page. They even added sites to the list which I hadn't registered or even submitted to DMOZ. These sites only crime was they were linked to my site. I spoke to several lawyers about this. They told me that this constitutes a "restraint of trade", however to pursue the legal action would cost more money than I have to commit.
I really don't want to pursue legal action and tried several times to contact both the editor who added the sites to the list and the staff at DMOZ, but never received any response and I know the list hasn't been changed.
So what can I do? I make my living on the Internet and many others depend on me. DMOZ is in a situation where without its link it is almost impossible to achieve high ranking on Google.
If there is someone at DMOZ reading this, please help.
I would appreciate anyone's advice.

Chris_R

9:33 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Don't ever rely on what a lawyer tells you about the Internet :)

You can sue AOL - they don't care.

Anyway - there are two ways around this - the banging your head way - and my way.

You can continue to do what you are doing OR

get a new ip, email, and register sites under a company name, diiferent address and telephone number.

This won't help with your old sites, but it will with your new - and you can never be sure that if you do not do this - that they aren't going to penalize you.

Also, your ideas about google and dmoz are misplaced. You do not need to be in the DMOZ for a good ranking. It just so happens that many good sites are in the dmoz and google happens to show good sites in their rankings. the two aren't cause and effect.

allanp73

9:57 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I can't just abandon the sites. There is more than just me affected. I can ask the other companies to give up there sites as well. There are just too many people affected and too much money involved.
As for the importance of DMOZ. Look at the top sites on Google, the DMOZ link is extremely important. A DMOZ link is worth 100 other links. I have studied this for over a year and everytime I do the math it works out the same the DMOZ link is essential to high ranking on DMOZ.

ADDED: Actually, when one of the sites was removed from DMOZ it went from top 5 to being out of the top 200 after Google updated the link removal. The traffic to that site almost stopped and costed my business thousands.

[edited by: allanp73 at 10:02 pm (utc) on Oct. 28, 2002]

Beachboy

10:01 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Oh heck I have high-ranking sites that are not in ODP. It can be a boost (or not much of a boost) depending on a variety of factors, but it's hardly life and death....

cornwall

10:38 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



One editor saw that I was the register of some of the sites and immediately added these new sites to my ex-editor page. They even added sites to the list which I hadn't registered or even submitted to DMOZ

A meta may prove me wrong, but as far as I am aware it is unlikely that an editor would normally check a "routine" submission against an ex-editors list, unless the reviewer had some reason to do so.

Assuming that your new submission was indeed a new site, not just a clone of an earlier one, reviewers normally have better things to do than check against "whois" to see who the registrant is. They would then have to check against the "Ex-editors" list and link you with a particular ex-editor....not an easy thing to do unless its a specialist topic and the present editor knows who you are (perhaps from the spat that resulted in your being dismissed the service)

Memories are long in DMOZ, but normally ex-editors are not discriminated against...unless there is some personal needle. If you honestly believe that you are being unjustly kept out of DMOZ with new sites, then file an abuse report with full chapter and verse...but if you know that the discrimination is justified, then avoid making more enemines within the gilded portals of DMOZ by filing a complaint that will get nowhere.

MarkHutch

10:44 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



We have 12 domains of which 10 are NOT listed in DMOZ. ALL 12 rank well with Google. I think you're putting too much value on the DMOZ listing. Take a few days and think about this before you do anything legal in nature. I believe Google cares more about content than a link within DMOZ. Just my opinion.

Chris_R

10:49 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I know for a fact that people put too much emphasis og dmoz.

Unless you are in:

dir1/dir2

or something like that - the boost it gives you is generally small.

google updates once a month and sites go up and down for a variety of reasons.

the #1 reason that you see sites from the dmoz in top listings is for the reason I already mentioned:

Google picks good sites and in general - good sites are in the dmoz.

This will not persuade people that swear that their yahoo and dmoz listings help them immensly in google.

I have hundreds of sites in and out of dmoz. Do I like dmoz? Sure. Do I submit to dmoz? Sure. Would it bother me tomorrow if dmoz went down the tubes? Not really - it would all average out.

allanp73

10:54 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



The original site was in a completely different industry. The new site that I submitted was part of real estate network and one the site's in the network was linked to the site which was on the ex-editor list.
Dmoz editors are especially paranoid about real estate related sites. I guess the editor did a whois look up and saw that the real estate I submitted and the original site were owned by an ex-editor. Then went even further and quickly added all the sites that were linked in the network to the list.
I saw all of this because my wife was an editor as well.
I did report the abuse but got no results. I know that the list is still there because I've seen it in my web logs and strangely was able to view the list.
I really need someone at DMOZ to take notice and help out. I obeyed all the submission guidelines. This is really hitting hard many people. It does not seem fair that one editor can effectively decide to destroy mine and others businesses.

NOTE: This has been going on for several months now. And I've tried many tries to try to get help from DMOZ.

choster

11:34 pm on Oct 28, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



(The contents of URL notes are confidential. Please do not ask friends or family members who are editors to act in contravention of [dmoz.org...] ).

While editors are advised to read internal editor notes [dmoz.org] on urls prior to listing, a note solely indicating "Owned by ex-editor someguy" does not enjoin an editor to deny it a listing permanently and universally.

A note "Owned by ex-editor and persistent deeplink spammer someguy" still wouldn't ban the site, and an "Owned by ex-editor someguy-- check for cloaked affiliate links" note is similarly a directive to check-- not to delete automatically. Nothing in the Site Selection Criteria [dmoz.org] obliges an editor to bar such a listing; rather, the editor is more expected to look at the site to confirm the notes and not take them at face value.

Explicit flagging and banning of sites-- "Owned by ex-editor someguy's company, which installs redirects to child pornography as soon as url is published in Google. DO NOT ADD" in a big red box and boldface type -- is relatively rare compared against the millions of urls already in the directory and the hundreds of thousands waiting for review. And the banned sites are typically from known spammers [dmoz.org], or from domain hijackers, cloaked resellers, or others whose content cannot be trusted to resemble in a week what it appears to be at the point of editorial review.

So again, as others in this thread have said for various reasons, don't lose too much sleep regarding those sites.

allanp73

12:13 am on Oct 29, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



The orginal ex-editor list had only two sites. Now the list has over twenty sites on it. As a result the sites have not been added to DMOZ despite the fact they are of high quality. I talking hundreds of pages of useful content. The sites were submitted over 4 months ago. From my web logs I can see how the editors view the sites. They aren't even giving them a chance.
DMOZ powers not just Google but over 8000 other search engines and directories. It is a big deal!

How would you feel if your site was linked to mine and suddenly was added to this list and prevented from being added to DMOZ?

My reputation and the reputations of others is affected. My business and the businesses of others is affected.
It is a big deal!

This 153 message thread spans 16 pages: 153