Forum Moderators: open
One would be one category lower than the other; they're in clothing categories. Will it be a problem getting both accepted?
Will it be a problem getting both accepted?
Yes.
Many ODP editors commonly check even WhoIs information in an effort to make sure that a company does not have more than one listing in ODP. Having more than one in Shopping can really be a problem.
I would suggest that you make the sites as different as possible in both design and in content.
I guess you could at least alter it here and there like renaming files, changing graphics size, changing positioning of graphics etc
Ive never been in this situation, and never suffered anything as a result of it, but If I were you I'd approach this one with a bit caution, and if it all goes wrong please tell :)
Merely having the same design elements shouldn't be a problem - look at Front Page themes or other commercial templates, for example. However, same design, similar content, similar category... sounds risky.
Merely having the same design elements shouldn't be a problem
Actually, that's not true. Keep in mind that editors of ODP are individual and are not bound by mandatory rules the way Yahoo or Zeal editors are.
Now, ponder the fact that an editor's prejudices about the website design itself can play a part in whether or not you get listed. No, it's not supposed to, and that's the extreme, but it does happen more often than you want to know.
There are areas of the directory that do not allow "cookie-cutter" sites, and in fact, there was an ongoing thread in the forum there which kept track of those sites which were ascertained to be cookie-cutter sites and basically blacklisted.
I would repeat my advice to make them as different as possible.
Sites with almost identical content is another issue. In a "topical category" the editor may pick what he or she thinks is the best and list only that one - even if the sites have different owners. If it's a Business or Shopping category the rules are somewhat different. Two sites offering the same services or selling the same products may be listed, as long as they represent different companies.
Will it be a problem getting both accepted?
It's impossible to answer that quastion without seeing/reviewing the sites.
But as someone in control of the sites I make, I would alter them slightly, just to be on the safe side. That is unless all these sites are using the best design in the world of course, and then it would be pointless changing any design for SE's :)
For example, lets say someone was putting together a series of sites about Emergency Services, just a topic picked out of the air, the news is playing in the background.
They may want to create a site about Police Emergency work, which has its own set of problems and challenges, and another site about Fire Emergency Work, again its own set of problems, and another about Hospital Emergency Rooms, again its own...., well you get the idea.
The common thread is Emergencies, and the possibilities for interlinking so similar situations and problems would be quite interesting, yet each Service would have its own way of dealing with emergency situations dependant on their own particular focus and would therefor warrant it's own site rather than simply be a directory within the one major site.
So it would make sense to keep an homogenous design, perhaps changing colors or logos, yet keep everything in the same place and with the same information architecture so as to make it easy for people who cross from one site to another.
The difficulty come not with the nest of sites itself. but rather the perception of the purpose of those sites by the editors in any directory. The sites may have been put together that way to enable members of each Emergency disipline to be able to focus on their own service and yet give them access to related services should the need arise. And yet an editor may view these as simply an attempt to garner additional listings and therefor increased referals.
So, the question is, "how would a nest of sites based on the above example be viewed by ODP editors, or any directory editors for that matter?"
Onya
Woz
Yep, ideally a common theme could have a common design. But due to these X factors, like ODP editors and algorithms we are thinking twice
We all know there are a 1000001 scams going on, so we have to watch out for innocent things that we do that could be interpreted as guilty
Marcia seems pretty innocent to me :) IMO I would be worried about looking at sites with identical design...but anyways
For sure its a grey area, a gray area too, but where computers are involved (i.e. pure logic) i wouldnt want to present two sites that use a very similar amount of identical information (the design).
But im just repeating the thread ;)
So, the question is, "how would a nest of sites based on the above example be viewed by ODP editors, or any directory editors for that matter?"
In ODP, it depends upon which category they're submitted to, the editor, the editor's understanding of the guidelines and category guidelines, what the guidelines happen to be at that time, what the policy -- yes, that's different than the policy -- is at that time, the size of the category/s involved, just to name a few.
To be concise: It's a crapshoot. :(
Yes, you might manage to slip past a sleepy editor occasionally; but even if you manage that, chances are you'll be spotted before too long.
ODP is very patient where honest errors are made; but none too sympathetic to submitters who try it on. Be smart, or be nice - your choice, but consider the consequences.
Unless there is a compelling reason to list sites from the same company that sell slightly different products, I would think that one site would be chosen and the site would get a regional (if applicable) and topical listing in the highest appropriate category.
If the store sold panty hose and farm tractors it would probably get listed twice in topical cats and once in regional since the product offerings are so different and one topical category probably wouldn't do the site justice. One domian or two it probably would not matter.
There are of course, no absolutes when dealing with directories.
Usually the sites are heavily interlinked, and there is clearly some sort of business interrelationship. But, as I remember the ODP guidelines, domain ownership shouldn't be a factor in listing.
In reply to the original question: If the two sites would go into a parent cat and its subcat, and the more specific one is easily reached from the more general one (eg. by one or two clicks from the homepage), then it's likely that only the more general one would get listed (though nobody should chastise you for submitting both, just to see what happens).
But then, I don't edit in Shopping/, so I'm not familiar with the exact way things are handled there. Do we have any Shopping/ editors hanging around here?
Very good question!
It very much depends on the *content* - One design company I know of specializes in book stores; they all have the same page layout, but unique graphics, unique inventories, and shared shopping cart.
Not a problem; designs are similar, but the key aspect - content - is unique. Sharing merchant services is not Dmoz's worry.
The problem with most malls is that they share inventory - or have none, merely taking affiliate commission.
Editors look for uniqueness, and look away from affiliation!!
bird - Great research tip... Now I see why you do so well on the Gizmo Quiz.
>>...designs are similar, but the key aspect - content - is unique.... Editors look for uniqueness, and look away from affiliation!!<<
Also important information... thanks.
Meantime, it turns out it had been submitted by someone without any of us knowing (including the site owner)and is now in the directory. The other one isn't though, and even though I've got no responsibility for it at this point, I'm working with the person who designed both and to be on the safe side I'll write and ask that the other not be submitted until after this one is redesigned.
>the key aspect - content - is unique.
Which raises the question - how much can be unique with shopping sites aside from different mixes of merchandise and original product descriptions?
>Editors look for uniqueness, and look away from affiliation!!
That makes sense in cases where text from the merchandise companies is put on sites verbatim; but some are creatively done, with original copy and a lot of attention paid to detail. Would all affiliate sites be equally excluded?
This is definitely getting into areas of 'editor discretion', and a big clue will be the other sites in the category.
Affiliation itself is not the problem - it's the site itself; if it's 'just' affiliate links, it's out. If there's enough content for an editor to think "it's not an affiliate site, it's a site with affiliate links", then it'll be judged on the the 'other' bits, accepting that it has those links (but they aren't the *core* of the site).
For example, if a site about James Bond is interesting, informative and happens to have a few Amazon links, the assessment will be made on the 'interesting and informative' bits.
I hope that has not made it worse for you!!
No, not at all in this case. These in particular aren't affiliate sites, they have the merchandise and ship it themselves.
There are also sites that have drop shipping, and in some cases there are a multitude of sites selling the same products that actually aren't affiliate sites.
For example, say there are 100 stores in Los Angeles selling designer ladies' clothing. They all stock them, and carry brands such as Ann Taylor, Givenchy, Liz Claiborne, etc. Of course, those come from the same manufacturers and the stores are all in the same city. There would be a limit on how much original content could be on the sites (the manufacturers may have restrictions), and strictly speaking, their potential web customers might all be small town folks with no access to that merchandise except on the web. They might not want to read, they're probably more interested in the visual presentation and seeing the merchandise. So how could there be a limitation on how many of those stores were listed, when they all have different owners?
Another example is department store sites. There really isn't that much difference in content between them, just a different selection of merchandise, probably catering to different price markets.
That would relate to the question about online shopping malls, particularly.
It's a good subject to know more about, the shopping must be very interesting categories to work with.
They should *all* be listed, if they sell online and hold their own inventory.
Don't lose sight of the *reason* dmoz doesn't list affiliates ... it's because listing 233,598 Amazon clones would squeeze out the real stores, while not being a useful service to visitors.
Dmoz proudly boasts that it is not there as a service to webmasters, and in discussions neither 'editor convenience' nor webmaster benefit are considered compelling, if held up against visitor benefit.
Several ex-editors would disagree, I'm aware!
