Changing your site listing

Retired please minstrel Sounds so much more civilised. Summer - I started in Shopping then moved onto Regional but still kept my Shopping cat and carried on editing there because I knew the guys there. So if anyone asks I would say Regional and Shopping but my real expertise was in Regional.

I can't remember exactly why now - it all blurs into a senility-induced haze. Disagreement with general direction the Admins were taking everyone in, too much fluff not enough substance, not enough time and a tax return to complete, and a spot of irritation at Adult as a side dish. I think.

 

I don't think I could afford a shopping cat. Three shopping kids is expensive enough.

 

It's not that no one's listening. It's that DMOZ will never admit to a mistake without an all out war or a very messy puppy kicking contest... it's just really not fair to the puppies.

See rules #1 through 4 above.

 

It is not what you have or don't have, it is what they pretend that you have. The doorway pages magically become "sites" while Domains with content becomes doorway pages.


There are no real rules but we make them up as we go along to suit our goals at that moment. - The golden rule of all DMOZ policies

 

They are, but the thing is so difficult to explain. I can understand what you are saying too. It took me 18 months and maybe 18,000 edits for things to finally click competely.

Would it be fair if you received one listing for each different domain you put up for each target group of customers - 2 domains, 3, 10, 20; and someone who put all their clothing products on one domain with a menu leading to their lingerie, their accessories, their fashion, and their jewelry lines, if they only got one listing? Wouldn't that be giving you an advantage because of the way you have chosen to market your business on separate domains? Sorry but that is the best way of explaining it I can think of. Whether the one listing is the right one I don't really know.

Forget the Gaps and Banana Republics, they are a bad comparison because they aren't splitting their products onto different domains but are independent competing trading companies and each trading company still gets only one listing.

 

No puppies are ever harmed in DMOZ, I can't say the same about cats.

 

How long DMOZ has been concerned with what is fair for webmasters or business owners? Where in DMOZ guideline states that DMOZ should decide how people should do business?
If the goal is to help the end users, doesn't listing any site that has unique and quality content helps with this goal? Isn't a site that is more concentrated on a unique type of product actually more useful than a site that has everything mixed and under what category should such a site get listed?
If we are really thinking about end users then sites should be listed in their proper category, so users can find it (It is a directory and not search engine) and in this case how will multiple link will be different than multiple domain listing?

 

You forgot the most important rule. "There is no DMOZ Club".

 

Yes, if you have evidence of abuse by a meta, please tell me (or another one of the Admins) about it. Send me a PM here, or send me feedback via the link on my dmoz profile -- whichever arrangement you trust more.

Maybe they are two separate stores, but when two websites both say Vicious Enterprises at the bottom of every page, both list the same phone number, have staff photos that appear to be the same people, and have lots of prominent links between the two sites, it seems fair to conclude that these are two different departments of the same e-store -- sort of like walking in different doors of a big city department store that faces two different streets.

Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy may belong to the same company, but they have different people running their stores and they don't answer the phone for each other.

 

That's the problem - if you had doorway pages with free images (I think it's 20) and some affiliate links, they'd be listed.

 

Here is the link to my previous post about 5 doorway pages that goes to the same phone sex business listed in DMOZ and owned by an editor. I can also give you a list of doorway pages owned by a meta's company but what is the point? Abuse in adult editors dictionary has been defined as norm, deleting a listing here or there after it has been discovered will not change anything since the next day new ones will be added. There is a need for structural change to fix the problem, window dressing doesn't help.

 

I just noticed that orlady has removed 3 of the 5 listings that was mentioned in my post above this one. I suppose the removal of those listings directly after my posting proves that those were abusive listings and not according to the guideline.

This is very interesting specially in light of sidjf posting in previous thread:

"The cheap-phone-sex(.)net listing is just as good (if not better) than any of the other sites listed in that category. If the cheap-phone-sex(.)net site belongs to an editor, then why would that be abuse?

In the interest of full disclosure (I have nothing to hide) - I was the editor that created that category.

I had a hell of a time find good quality sites for it (as can be seen). But each of them meets the requirements to be listed in Adult/Image_Galleries."

Does this mean that senior editors in adult like sidjf are aware of abuse and listings that are against guideline but they will try to make excuses and justify it or does it mean that even senior editors in DMOZ don't know what the guideline is?

If the guidelines are so unclear that even senior editors can not understand and agree on it then how does new editors suppose to know?

I just hope that orlady didn't get too busy deleting those listings to forget the most important part of my last post:

deleting a listing here or there after it has been discovered will not change anything since the next day new ones will be added. There is a need for structural change to fix the problem, window dressing doesn't help.

 

Sorry Summer the gap must be in terminology or linguistics. OK you have two separate stores owned by one business, Vicious Enterprises? Shopping will only list one store from a group of related ones per business. Gap, etc. would count as separate businesses. Why - some criteria I would use as indicators - separate CEO, separate corporate registration, separate accounts, unrelated marketing campaigns, won't exchange each others goods, different premises, staff not interchangeable, and, where I live anyway, stores trading in the same shopping districts and competing for the same customers.

Oh, and before they were sold off when my parents retired, the family business was a chain of retail ladies clothing stores, so I do have some understanding of that commercial area.

 

These conversations would be less frustrating if I had some clue what you were talking about.

 

I am only posting here once to set the record straight on some of Summer's questions. I am not going to subject myself to the tactics used in here and don't particularly care how anyone choses to turn around what is said.

As to the original gripe about having hustlepanties.com listed as viciousenterprises.com it is pretty self explanatory if anyone would have read the description for the Shopping category. An important part of that description states:

Those that aren't will be changed when I or someone else gets a round to it.

Vicious Enterprises is simply the main URL of your business of shopping sites and contains links to hustlerpanties.com, viciousstyle.com, and your eBay site. There is no listable content for a Business listing.

The company's name behind all of the sites is guess what, Vicious Enterprises, if someone were to send a check it would be made out to Vicious Enterprises, and the return address on any products received would state Vicious Enterprises.

All or most of the products sold on hustlerpanties.com and viciousstyle.com are either clothing or accessories. Hence the moving of the site to Shopping/Clothing which best encompasses the contents of the two sites.

If someone wants to complain that ODP listed a doorway page to an eBay auction site, go for it.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled ODP bashing thread. May you all live and prosper on the_other_side.

 

It's amazing how defensive these turds get. So defensive are they, that they feel compelled to sign up to make ONE post in DP, to defend their maniacal lack of sensibility and reason.

Why not be a man and sign your name to your post. I'm adding "coward" to the list of derogatory phrases for which to describe the editing community in DMOZianaland.

One other thing(though you said you will not respond more than once.)

I wonder... Is a "doorway page to an eBay auction site" the same as say, kiddie porn?

Any respect I could have had for DMOZ has completely faded from existence thanks to your post.

 

Just curious: is "somebodynamedbob" the same person as "bobrat" aka "macdesign"?

 

Huh? Sorry you missed it, but he did use his name. It's Bob. And I think everyone involved knows who Bob is, including Summer.

Yes and no. Neither are listed in DMOZ but submission to eBay sites are simply declined and deleted. Kiddie porn is reported to the proper authorities before being declined and deleted. Trust me on this, I've come across both and this is the simple truth, without any twists.