Forum Moderators: open
There are several categories that are relevant to my site. Should I choose one with the least number of entries? I ask this as my site would be way down on the category list alphabetically!
Thanks in advance.
gtodell
"nearby" ed's are not the ones you should email. It should be an ed from a cat above the one you are trying to add to. They all have permissions to edit cats below them. You can see at the bottom of the page if they are active or not so skip any that are not.
Dauction,
if you just want an editor to look at your site without adding it, then I really don't understand the point of this whole discussion. I am sure that you have read the guidelines, which means that you can "review" your site for compliance just as well yourself.
Btw: If you're talking about the link in your profile, then you already knew from the beginning that it would be rejected. The ODP doesn't list doorway domains to other shopping sites, especially not if the real thing is already listed.
dauction, as a former insider you present a fairly depressing view of the state of DMOZ. Quite scary, considering the significant influence with SE's that the directory has.
As I understand, dauction was an "insider" several years ago. Both the text of the guidelines as well as their implementation have been made much stricter since then. There are prominent examples to illustrate those changes, but that's not a topic for this forum.
I have always looked at from the searchs perspective..they want "product" they type in "product" and thats what I want to serve up to them..I have always considered the other stuff like reviews etc..as fluff..
That's not what I call "searchers perspective". What you're describing here sounds more like a "sellers perspective". Sellers tend to believe that people have no other goals in mind than to look for their own products... ;)
In contrast to that, the ODP really is about information. As long as you don't appreciate this difference, you'll continue to be frustrated with your attempts at getting sites listed. Product searches are often better served by one of the many commercial directories out there.
Greenbuster? Ok, thats a term I dont recall
Greenbuster is a (relatively) new special editing permission, which makes it possible for people to review sites in categories where they wouldn't normally be able to edit. They can then store the resulting listings in a special queue, and a "real" editor with full permissions there will add them after some spot checking. This is a measure to reduce the unreviewed queues in areas where there are not enough editors, while still maintaining the targeted quality
2nd.Btw: If you're talking about the link in your profile, then you already knew from the beginning that it would be rejected. The ODP doesn't list doorway domains to other shopping sites, especially not if the real thing is already listed.
False..nearly EVERY site in the shopping area is just that doorways to the "real thing" as you say
The very first listing for example:The only way to defend myself is to show it is false..
since I cant provide a link.just type in "posters" at dmoz .the main page that pops up..the very first listing is just a "doorway" to the real thing as you say.!!!!!!Come to think about it all retailers are nothing more than doorways to the wholesaler..
As far as that goes perhaps they should just let the original wholesaler list and drop all the retailers ! LOL
so obviously the guidelines have not changed since the very first listing isnt a "real thing".
4th you claim I think it is only a "sellers" perspective and that perhaps I should move on to a commercial listing site.
.
OK , thats what I did..I submitted my site to the SHOPPING category. ;) You see I didnt submitted it to the "information" category..because the people I am marketing to arent looking for information..they are looking for PRODUCT.
When you enter your local shopping center SHOPPING do you want the history of everything you want to buy ? of course not ...you came to shop not read.
Considering I have a conversion rate of 1/40 (buyer/traffic) seems ..well maybe I do know what I am talking about.
Finally you highlight my earlier point about the flaw in the DMOZ model is that all the listings are subjective to the whim of whoever may be playing editor that day.(or whoever is scratching who's back)
You seem to be missing the point Bird..is my site a masterpiece? of course not ..is it a clean and appropriate site fo the category I submitted to..yes, well is my product line relevant to the category ? of course it is..
that should be the final say and from then on it must beable to compete with the other sites..the shopper should be the final say as to whether it appeals to them ..not a arbitrary decision of one..(communism)speaking of which I see cuba is well represented there.Ummm? LOL
I guess Frenchy's post sums up nicely the flaw in DMOZ.
Some seem to think that DMOZ is morally above above the other SE's..
yet you even state that the 50,000 editors that DMOZ platers all over it's site is blatantly false..that the true number is around 6000-8000 ..making for an even cozy neighborhood LOL
So is there really 3.5 million sites lited or should we is the rue number around 15% of that ?
See this highlights my point about how as long as humans are involved the truth will be stretched, backs will be scratched, favors handed out , out right fraud and EXCLUSIONS of others are just a daily part of whatever community ..
I understand your frustration, but existing bad listings don't justify new bad listings. The correct solution would rather be to remove any bad listings already present. If you care about the subject, please make a list of all the doorway pages in that category, go to [resource-zone.com...] and send that list to one of the metas in a private message. Someone will then look into it, and if they find your conclusions confirmed, the category will get cleaned up. You can either keep complaining about the rules of the game, or you can help us to improve the directory.
Other than that, It's not my job to criticize your site or to judge your ROI, nor would either be of any relevance in this context. I'm just trying to explain how the ODP works. Obviously, as everywhere, mistakes are made, and some people (very few, really) are trying to abuse the system. But the fact that errors exist certainly doesn't invalidate the concept.
It is very important to have a DMOZ listing (or more). Bird has given some sound advice that can help. It is far better to tweak your site to that goal than to continue attempting the same strategy.
Bird..sorry, I am not about to do someone elses job..why should I ?
And besides I see nothing wrong with the persons listing..
Fathom under DMOZ (supposed rule)my site will NEVER be able to be listed ..because I am an affiliate of a larger company.This was made clear when I was an editor .. never let an affiliate site in..
the reason you see other affiliate sites has to do with the 50,000 editors of which at any one time their is never more than 8,000 active(according to Bird)..people by the tens of thosands become editors at dmoz ..they list their own sites and off they go..
I mean think about it..do you REALLY believe 50,000 people want to review hundreds of sites..NO PAY , NO Benefits..simply for the enjoyment ? LOL
My site is already tweaked as a SHOPPING site..as it should be ..
The easist way to be listed in DMOZ is the same as it has always been..become an editor !
I am not jumping on you Bird..it's just that is is so obviously skewed it's rediculas ..I can go to just about any directory and find the same affiliate..it runs pretty much rampant across the board..and personally I dont have a problem with it..other than the fact that DMOZ has been more of a private club exercising it's subject powers to EXCLUDE any competition.
BIRD.. ...my suggestion for improving the integrity of the DMOZ database would be "submission meetings" for Category editors.....
Take the "posters" editors for example..I think there are like 6 possible places for submissions..
Then say each Monday ..The editors from each of those seperate categories meet in a chat room forum and decide as a committe which to include and which to exclude.
This would bring the "fraudulant" listings down by 80% or better I would guess.
Just makes the cheating so much more difficult.
much more effective than asking people whos sites are never going to be listed anyways to clean up dmoz for them ! LOL
Thats all Guys ..thank for the open discussion
I think that covers the vast bulk of the ODP editors, simply for the enjoyment.
I look at it this way;
Imagine you had the biggest bunch of "bookmarks" or "favorites" etc that you could want. It covers just about every subject that you would need.
Why would you add another site if you already had that area well covered?
Isn't intersting how many people are convinced that everybody is driven by exactly the same attitudes as they are?
Luckily, the world is a bit more diverse than that, or you would have no ODP to complain about... ;)
How about a measure of fair play?
BIRD:
Be polite now ! LOL
I really dont care about a DMOZ listing..just pointing out how flawed it is and how naive people are if they think DMOZ editors are doing this because it's some great past time for them without them getting something for it.
...how naive people are if they think DMOZ editors are doing this because it's some great past time for them without them getting something for it.
I've been an editor for over three years, and you're damn right I get something out of it - personal satisfaction. Those editors that join in order to list their own site are shown the door.
As for your site, you offer no unique content. Until you do, your site won't be listed.
then explain why the FRONT page has FOUR affiliate sites LOL
You all can huff and puff all you want..I am simply pointing out the truth..dont yell at the messenger..
Raf..I dont doubt for a second that you enjoy working as an editor at DMOZ and probably doing an outstanding job..just calm down and try and look at the reality of the situation.
I received an email back from an "oversear" of the posters area..he stated the same thing that affiliate sites are not allowed...after showing him the evidence he went on about how he is backloged with hundreds of submissions let alone looking at cats where the editors have disappeared.
It dosent get fixed by pretending their isnt a problem at DMOZ and taking it out on me.
All I am asking for is the same respect..if the sitews are allowed then lets us in..if they are not then boot them out.
Here is a list of sites that are nothing more than affiliate sites selling posters.(thats for sites on the FRONT page ! )
<edit>URL's snipped
[edited by: NFFC at 7:39 am (utc) on July 13, 2002]
If that is DMOZs rule absolutely no affiliate programs ..then it's obvious that those rules are not enforced..and I can show the same thing in most shopping cats..
DMOZ is under staffed..thats also clear simply by seeing so many Cats that need editors and from the email that I received ealier from an editor with 200 sites backlog.
The submissions will only grow...more and more listings with fewer and fewer editors..seems that DMOZ could implode at some point if some basic changes are not made..and their importance will diminish as a result.
Thats just what I see...maybe Netscape will intervene at some point and make those changes?
Show me where the content is on <edit>URL snipped/
Sometimes it's difficult to see the trees for a forest. On the site in question the actual images of vintage posters are the content. <edit>
If that is DMOZs rule absolutely no affiliate programs...
That's not quite accurate. Affiliate links are allowed, as long as the site offers some unique content. A site that provides an indepth analysis of Macbeth, for example, and then has an Amazon affiliate link to purchase the play, will be welcomed with open arms. Directories of affiliate links provide no use for the user, which is why they are not included.
[edited by: NFFC at 7:42 am (utc) on July 13, 2002]
So helping customers find what they are looking for has no value? If that's the case then it's time to shut down DMOZ, after all, that is all it does, and it has no content.
So helping customers find what they are looking for has no value?.
Users look for content. If they're looking to buy a posters, they want to find the poster they're looking for and pay for it. An affiliate directory is simply another step between the user and what he or she wants. Secondly, due to the incredibly low barriers-to-entry for every affiliate program there are tens if not hundreds of directories that all offer the same content. If you really believe users want to be accosted with that kind of spam, then by your reckoning Altavista should be the reigning SE now, not Google.
Bird made a post above that I think perfectly summarizes this kind of thinking: "That's not what I call "searchers perspective". What you're describing here sounds more like a "sellers perspective". Sellers tend to believe that people have no other goals in mind than to look for their own products...
In contrast to that, the ODP really is about information. As long as you don't appreciate this difference, you'll continue to be frustrated with your attempts at getting sites listed. Product searches are often better served by one of the many commercial directories out there. "
I don't run any affiliate sites myself, but it seems to me if an affiliate helps a customer find the poster they are looking for, they have performed a valuable service. Certainly that particular customer would think so.
>the ODP really is about information. As long as you don't appreciate this difference, you'll continue to be frustrated with your attempts at getting sites listed.<
Please, enough with the patronizing. My particular site is probably the single most unique site in one of the largest categories in DMOZ (63,000+ listings), and it was rejected for a cat that, as I previously posted, the cat description could be virtually used as a summary of my site!
We don't "point out" the competition, URL's have been snipped.
The subject matter is "How to choose DMOZ category?" please stay on topic.
dauction, you are being plain rude, please stop and always be polite to other members.
rafalk, thank you for your contributions to the thread thus far.
Play by DMOZ rules. Simple as that. They are available to read and study.
What is the difference between me complaining about not getting in Yahoo for free and someone else complaining not about getting into DMOZ? Yahoo would say that their rules are that you have to pay them first. DMOZ may say that their rules say they don't accept affiliate sites. Google may say that they don't accept German bombmaking sites.
And if there are other sites that are in there against the guidelines? It's the same as complaining about the sites in Google with their rankings because of same colour text or cloaked pages. If they get discovered they get binned. So do the DMOZ sites that break the rules.
It isn't a fundamental right of every human to get their site listed in DMOZ - there is a selection process here.
With affiliate sites, I would judge that the selection process would say that you would get the same or more detailed information at the home site so that is the one that should be listed.
(For information, I am not an editor and my sites have not been listed either.)
The problem is the rules are not enforeced.
Look after I finally got ahold of an Editor that can make a decision to include me for that Cat here is is response to my email:
"Sorry, but I don't knowingly list ANY affiliate sites. This is DMOZ policy"
So then I point out 4 posters affiliate sites on the front page and he wrote back that he wont remove them.
So this goes back to my back scratching talk..like i said I was an editor at DMOZ ..I know how it works.
In the meantime these 4 affiliate sites are my competitors and they have an unfair business advantage in that it isnt just about being listed in DMOZ ,it's that DMOZ feeds so many of the other important sites like AOL and Google, I will NEVER beable to get above those 4 with that advantage.
So you see the larger problem of them cheating..dont think for a moment this is an isolated incident .it is rampant through DMOZ and it has to stop.
How would you like it if all your competitors are allowed to cheat and DMOZ encourages it !
Certainly not?
Are there editors at DMOZ that bend the rules, read between the lines, or have their own personal agenda?
Probably. But its is a voluntary organization and editors have enough legit listings to deal with.
You are obviously concerned about getting listed dauction, you have walked the same posts time after time.
It would seem that you know what you need to do and if your not prepare to develop a web site that can get into DMOZ, then you have no arguments left.
I certainly don't like the idea of editors forgeting my listings just so they can start reviewing sneekies because another sneeky couldn't get by the initial review?
You really can't expect writing the same post over and over again is going to reward you with different results.
As you have previous indicate you were a DMOZ editor... do you believe my legit listings should go unreview simply because you don't like your rejection and therefore you want DMOZ editor to waste time finding all the other sneekies like you.
I have business priorities, I would suspect DMOZ has the same like "reviewing new listings".
What are your business priority.
DMOZ is an excellent resource - and I generally get listed between 2 - 8 days. But this only happens when editors are focused on news listings and not old garbage ones!
Now that is very unfair. dauction has been totally upfront that his site is an affiliate site, and is not trying to sneak anything. He has made a legitimate point that other affiliates are listed and his is not, even though they are similar and competitors. If you were in his shoes you would be just as upset.
fathom, you say you get listed in in 2 to 8 days. I am sure you feel this is very fair, but what about many of us who don't. You would be just as upset as I am that your site was rejected from a cat that was a perfect fit. It is so easy to criticize others for complaining about their problems when you don't have any yourself. Be thankful, and don't belittle our problems - they are real, and significant!
I have a site - I want to increase my exposure, I start an afiliate project where I allow the affiliates a free copy of my site and 10 - 15% of any sales that come through their pages.
I have my pages in DMOZ, is it fair to allow 1 or 1000 of these site into DMOZ and into the same catagories that my pages are in.
Personally I would just love this and the primary company associated with dauction would to but how fair is it.
Dauction is an x-editor of DMOZ and knows all to well why these policies are in place yet continues to submit his affiliate site and fixates on other sites like his as justification to be submitted.
In addition, the topic of this thread is "How to choose DMOZ category?" yet rather than providing insight for the forum members questions he continues to focus the attention on his personal situation and gives little to the thread topic.
His personal ripes are in a half dozen threads started by other members who have legit concerns just like his. I don't have a problem with dauction but since his first post 10:03pm on the 11th in this thread not 1 post has been on the thread topic "How to choose DMOZ category?" and in review other threads he (maybe unintentionally)has also displaced the thread topic.
I don't believe this is the purpose of WMW But I could be wrong!
I believe other members have the same rights as dauction however, the moment that he posted the thread topic was gone and I think this is quite sneeky.
It would be better served to all if dauction started his own thread on the topic of his choosing and allow other members the same courtesy.
I point out direct violations of this policy and DMOZ refuses to remove the sites..is that ethical? is that moral?
The bottom line is once they DO know about their policy being abused and they refuse to remove the sites.
You also refuse to look at the larger picture..those sites are not JUST in DMOZ ..it gives them unfair advantage clear across the web ..in all the SE's that DMOZ feeds..
That IS serious..
Al you have to do is look around at other postings and realize how ticked off people are already at DMOZ ...
The only people defending DMOZ are editors and people with sites already in DMOZ..
Perhaps I need a more judicial audience ?
[dmoz.org...]
--------------------------------------
Now, one last time, the topic of this thread is "How to choose DMOZ category?"
Yes, I would really like to know. So editors, tell me how could my site be denied a listing in a cat that anyone could look at my site and match up just from looking at the title? This should have been the easiest decision that editor ever made, but instead I get screwed, and I don't know why.
As many listings today tend to be deeplinked I find the editor compares the requested listing page to the main page and in addition reviewing a number of the subordinate pages via the requested listing.
Editing the anchor text (title) and description is only one part of their jobs.
So editors, tell me how could my site be denied a listing in a cat that anyone could look at my site and match up just from looking at the title? This should have been the easiest decision that editor ever made, but instead I get screwed, and I don't know why.
While you may think it's painfully obvious what category your site belongs in, it's quite another matter for an editor. Your site has been bounced around like a hot-potato simply because editors don't know what to make of it, including me. This is not unusual in sites that deal with Religion. If it helps, as of right now your site is waiting to be reviewed in Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Christianity/Bible/ [dmoz.org].
Thanks for looking into it - I appreciate it. Right now I'll take the Bible cat.
