Hello, I've found this two links I'd like to share with you: In the first place an OLD forum topic from a guy willing to pay for getting it's site listed on DMOZ. Pay attention to his domain name: http://www.textndata.com/articles/webmaster-world/i-will-pay-dmoz-18508/ The second link is just a DMOZ category. Here pay attention to the fifth entry: http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/North_...Toronto/Business_and_Economy/Home_and_Garden/ May be I'm missing something. Any help would be appreciated.
You appear to be trolling. How do you know the site was not accepted as part of the normal approval process? If you have any concrete proof of wrongdoing/corruption, post it for us to see. The site does appear legitimate and in the correct category. Innuendo like this is is a waste of everyone's time.
I don’t think caprichoso have to prove anything because he is not claiming his finding as being a fact but nearly offering his observations and asking for our opinions.
Claudek, thank you for sharing your point of view with us. From the text of your message I see you think this is a corruption case. And the site wasn't accepted as part of the normal process. In the other hand you say the site appears to be legitimate and in the right category. But I guess that has little to do with the way the site was listed.
As I mentioned, this thread appears to be a trolling one. The title of the thread and the links you provided with your "query" gives no illusion as to the "paying to get listed" in DMOZ innuendo.
Is there a way to find out when a site is listed? like the site inclusion date? If that site is listed shortly after November 22, 2003 which is the msg posted date then we've got something here.
Well, that's what I was looking for. In DMOZ site there is no such information. But the RDF dump could be providing some extra metadata about the entries. It would be interesting know the editor who added the link, too.
... anyone with more than 2 cell brains if is spending half a hour maybe a hours browsing dmoz will find similar listings . Just need to have some patience and some niches to follow ... ps. I can bet Jim will come and will tell you all it's '' link rot ''
Not my job to defend their crew... but they DO have a few thousand editors on the rolls, most of whom don't ever read DP. Assuming that whoever added a site was "bought" sorta requires one to believe every editor there reads every thread in this subforum. There are a few that come here regularly, but the bulk of 'em do not. The probability is the site was accepted thru the normal queue or just got added by some editor that saw it and said "Hmm, this fits the niche I edit". There's only a finite list of 'em that can edit anywhere... most have small assigned categories. IMO, the test is whether it belongs in that category... cause there's no way for us to know it was added by some guy that reads this place (and statistically the odds are it wasnt). In here we see only a smattering of their more vocal editors. Whether they drive your impression of their directory for better or worse, they aren't the entire crew, just the tip of the berg. My 2 cents... YMMV.
Doesnt prove it did or didnt happen under suspicious circumstances, but it definitively eliminates a few thousand people from possible suspicion cause they flat couldnt touch it.
I don't see how that is more likely than a paid listing. I mean, we can't be certain unless we have mor data. And in the mean time, I wouldn't think one is more likely than the other. If some body is going to pay to get his site listed on DMOZ, I guess it will be to get the site listed in the right category. Why would someone pay for getting his site listed in the wrong category?
Good point, but maybe cowboy have some good theory or know something about editors hobbies to misplace links "by mistake" in wrong categories. But what I would love to know, is how in a world you can test something like that?
People ask for listings in a category they'd prefer instead of the one their site should be in all the time. Frequently a biz located in City_A will ask for a listing at topical level, state level, national level, or in a bigger nearby City_B. I didn't say it was rational, but it is commonplace. Didn't suggest there was any certainty one way or the other. Some people hear hoofbeats and think "zebras". Where I'm at it's usually just horses again. Have 10 yrs in the industry, some of it was there, & I haven't seen near as much of what you think goes on as I've seen posts declaring it to be true. Have seen cases where abuse happened, & they were dealt with upon discovery. Always the chance my view may not match yours because mine's tainted by actual experience on the topic.
If you have a problem, report it: http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/?cat=R.../Toronto/Business_and_Economy/Home_and_Garden
Let me see if I got it right about what you are saying. On one hand we have moron with money who has no idea what he wants and on another hand, you want us to believe that an idiot editor who is so greedy that he will add link wherever client wants without following his editorial guidelines simply because this is commonplace. It just doesn’t make any sense cowboy, because then we have to assume that every dmoz editor is potential idiot and I’m sure editors will say to you that you are wrong about that.
No, not even close. Never indicated the webmaster was a moron, that he didn't know what he wants, or that editors will add a link wherever somebody wants it. Suggested the contrary. Recommend actually reading posts before replying.
Where did I say Webmaster? Show me that You said Business and that is why I said moron with money. Then you said while talking about editors Mind you without any claim that editors never take any bribes but rather indicating that they possibly do Now, this is what I and others can read in your posts
I also said I "Have seen cases where abuse happened, & they were dealt with upon discovery." Obviously you'd love a fight... and I understand you're still upset that I got your other login booted... but it'd save a lotta wasted posts if you'd simply read before replying. Good luck with that.
Long story short, you say when someone bribes an editor to get his site listed, most of the time, he wants a category his site doesn't belong to. And you think so because you have a lot of experience in the topic. Well. I'm not so trained in the link publishing business. But it doesn't make sense to me, yet. I mean, I understand someone willing to get listed on a higher level. A city business being listed at national level. That's ok. What I don't get is how will that give us a clue about whether the site was listed for money. Let's say the customer wants his site listed at national level, when it belongs to city level. The situation would resolve like this, 95% of the time: customer —List my site at national level. Here is the money. editor —Your site goes to city level. customer —I'm paying, I want it national! editor —City or nothing. customer —Ok. City. In the end, I think you are trying to defend DMOZ editors in advance and, as happens all the time with someone trying to defend DMOZ, you have no substantial arguments. Then you try to make us believe that your false proposition is true. "If the site is listed in the right category, it wasn't listed for money". That's a lie.