mutiple section.. confused with section choosing

hi all..
i have a site which has couple of section as songs, movies, quotes, poems and strories. now i'm confused with which section i should choose on DMOZ. should i submit individual section of pages to individual section or should i find a common one, if i need to find a common one which one would it be??
please help...
thanks in advance.

 

Submitting several pages is clearly a breach of guidelines, so don't do it.

 

Can you point to the specific guidelines this is against? It's CLEAR that it's OK to have multiple listings within the ODP, and it's clear that you can not submit the same direct URL (including masked urls, and deceit) but sending up the same domain with multiple sections should be OK... as the ODP does that ALL the time. So if it IS against the guidelines, can you please point to the specific location where it says that?

 

Can you tell me where it says other than "Suggest a site"? Not part of a site or pages from a site. All the guidelines address "How to submit a site". Please tell me how you can interpret that in a way that says you can send

.

Also guidelines say

http://www.dmoz.org/add.html
One site, one URL, parts are the same.
You might also like to READ the guideline reproduced below.

I am sure that you keeping on raising the same stuff about multiple listings really does not do you any credit, Q. We have repeatedly said that we do use multiple listings, I have repeatedly asked you to search for BBC, I have repeatedly told you what guidelines say. For your benefit I reproduce them here

http://www.dmoz.org/add.html

 

So much for submitting my googlepages site, and I assume that NONE of those yahoo groups sites were all editor added rather then suggestions? I also assume that all the deep links within the ODP were added by editors... I also assume that many of them are either nationally renowned sites or owned by editors themselves. Funny that the editors have one set of guidelines and submitters have another, yet when people post here asking . questions they are pointed to the editor guidelines.

Just what guidelines are submitters supposed to follow? Why are there two sets of guidelines? Why do the definitions within those guidelines keep changing?

Seems to me that something strange is going on and it looks really fishy that an editor can get his (or her) site listed hundreds or thousands of times yet the end user is not supposed to even suggest a diverse site to more then one APPLICABLE category.

Does not do me any credit? What kind of credit would it give me? I keep bringing up such things because they are seemingly NOT within the very guidelines YOU are currently trying to explain. You must understand why sooooo many people are confused.

I say one thing, and can prove I am an editor, yet you are going against what is right there in front of everyone and can not prove anything other then that the add page says to submit a site once...

Sorry, but I am simply going by the actual guidelines and the application of them as seen by the current editors.

 

With his talk of google and yahoo pages, Q might be confusing domain names with websites. They aren't the same thing at all as I thought he'd have learned by now.

That a website is sharing the root domain name of its host with many others doesn't make it connected with them in any meaningful way.

 

Well, that certainly explains Topix & the BBC

Nice save there jim!

 

Just keeping you honest .

 

Why not focus on keeping the ODP honest?

Which is it? Can people suggest deeplinks or can't they? If they can not, then why do editors point to the guidelines for people asking questions? Why do submitters needs to read the guidelines, when the guidelines do not apply to them?

Again. who is keeping the ODP honest? It's clear within this thread that 5 angel fire sites are different, and twenty thousand deeplinks to a single editor owned site that IS the same site are somehow both OK within the guidelines yet only one of the two are suggestable?

Now who are you really trying to keep honest? Clearly not me... I've not lied in this thread, I've simply pointed out a flawed logic within what Anonymously has posted (and note, he's certainly not honest, he keeps saying he is an editor, yet I've seen no evidence of that).

So yeah... what were you saying?

 

Q, you're just playing to the gallery. You already know the answers to your questions but I'll repeat them again here for your audience.

The multiple topix listings were the result of a deal betwean Topix and AOL (DMOZ's owners) and were implemented by a robot, not volunteer editors. That the owner of Topix was one of DMOZ's original founders is largely irrelevent. Many volunteers editors were very upset by the deal at the time and quite a few resigned over it. Editors who can think of nothing more constructive to do are at liberty to delete any topix listing that they think isn't a worthwhile resource.

The Suggestion Guidelines (intended for those wishing to suggest that we list a website) forbid multiple suggestions and the suggestion of related websites. This includes a ban on suggesting deeplinks. Ignoring those guidelines causes extra work for the volunteer editors, thus selfishly contributing to a process slowdown for everybody else, and is regarded as spamming. We treat spammers the same way that you treat spammers, though perhaps with a little more tolerance.

The Editor Guidelines (intended for editors) do permit deeplinking under some circumstances, but that's at editorial discretion. It's rarely done in commercial categories such as Business and Shopping.

Thanks for admitting that.

 

NO IT DOES NOT!

Step One

Determine whether a site is appropriate for submission to the ODP:

* Do not submit mirror sites. Mirror sites are sites that contain identical content, but have altogether different URLs.
* Do not submit URLs that contain only the same or similar content as other sites you may have listed in the directory. Sites with overlapping and repetitive content are not helpful to users of the directory. Multiple submissions of the same or related sites may result in the exclusion and/or deletion of those and all affiliated sites.
* Do not disguise your submission and submit the same URL more than once.
Example: http://www.dmoz.org] and http://www.dmoz.org/index.html]
* Do not submit any site with an address that redirects to another address.
* The Open Directory has a policy against the inclusion of sites with illegal content. Examples of illegal material include child pornography; libel; material that infringes any intellectual property right; and material that specifically advocates, solicits or abets illegal activity (such as fraud or violence).
* Do not submit sites "under construction." Wait until a site is complete before submitting it. Sites that are incomplete, contain "Under Construction" notices, or contain broken graphics or links aren't good candidates for the directory.
* Submit pornographic sites to the appropriate category under Adult.
* Submit non-English sites to the appropriate category under World.
* Don't submit sites consisting largely of affiliate links.
​

Jim might be confusing URL addresses with websites. They aren't the same thing at all as I thought he'd have learned by now. (this sound familiar?)

 

<panto> Oh yes they do. </panto>

Q is trying to interpret our Submission Guidelines as though they are a detailed piece of legislation and is attempting to convince people that he's found a loophole. It's not a matter of law, it's a matter of intent and most people don't have any problem with understanding that intent. If you prefer to follow a barrack room lawyer and risk the consequences, that's your choice .

I'm pleased to note that Q is not quarrelling with my re-iteration of the Topix situation. Perhaps he'll drop that particular red-herring in future (and pigs might fly).

 

Which part?

Nice evasion. Lets make the thread a personal attack against me rather then sticking to the ODP topic.

Hehe... trolling for me to go on about the shining example of broken guidelines? Ya know, the very guidelines we are talking about not breaking? LOL

I'll say the most damaging thing about it I possibly could....

The multiple topix listings were the result of a deal betwean Topix and AOL (DMOZ's owners) and were implemented by a robot, not volunteer editors. That the owner of Topix was one of DMOZ's original founders is largely irrelevent. Many volunteers editors were very upset by the deal at the time and quite a few resigned over it. Editors who can think of nothing more constructive to do are at liberty to delete any topix listing that they think isn't a worthwhile resource.​

 

Can you please explain that to markhood, my domain contains many unique websites/subsites not unstable deeplinks.

 

I had no intention to make a personal attack on you Q and I'm surprised and sorry that you discerned one. Rather, I'm trying to keep people's feet on the ground with some solid facts about the actualities of dealing with DMOZ.

 

IF you are really trying to '' keep peoples feet on the ground '' when you will do same ? The directory it's full of spam listings , not only topix case . Let's say BBC it's acceptable and reputable resource of information's , BUT ... there are hundreds of spam sites listed on the directory ( * one example it's the shalshdot story witch I pointed like a month ago ) ... Dealing with DMOZ it's easy to understand the rules are good , only thing it's those rules aren't followed it's seems starting from the way how editors are recruited and their dirty practice of editing ...

 

Facts like editors can have 20,000 deep links put in by a bot, but the end users are not supposed to submit deeplinks at all? Sure, that's keeping it real thanks for the clarifications, I'm sure it shows the ODP for what it really is.