Remove Listing from DMOZ

Well that's not what you've been saying the last few threads I've seen you post in ? No offence at all intended, but haven't you been a bit miffed that your site(s) haven't been included ?

If you're saying now that you're glad they haven't been, then I guess you have no beef with Dmoz or it's editors anymore and I wish you all the best !

 

My decision is based on the latest Google algo. I dont believe and if I am wrong please correct me but I havent said in the last week that I want a listing. Even more so in the last few days because I understand from an seo perspective what it means for Google to use Dmoz descriptions.

As for my site not being included sure I know that based on the current listings within Dmoz for that category my site is by far if not the best one of the best. Because Dmoz didnt list it, its their loss not mine. It only goes to show that Dmoz is not a organization of professionals but only a group of individuals with their own agendas.

As for my beef with SOME Dmoz editors, I still have those. This also includes some of Dmoz policies and guidelines and the arrogant nature of the powers that be within Dmoz.

 

I don't understand why there is so much discussion about this. The problem is very simple, he wants to remove his listing from DMOZ, so the question is how should he do it?

Add a section to your page that explains DMOZ and AOL involvement with child porn listings and put a link the child porn thread in this forum. Go to RZ, write a post and tell them about it and mention that your sites is also listed in DMOZ. It will be removed in a very very very short time.

 

Well, when he first posted I was going to take a look but he neglected to give his URL. Brizzie guessed what it might be but organix never bothered to let us know if brizzie guessed correctly or if he was upset about another URL.

 

The beauty of my solution is that the URL doesn't matter, it works for any site.

 

Yes you're right, I believe it would work for any site.

 

The question is, why an organization should be so stupid to force people to this kind of action, just to remove their site from the directory?

 

I believe that they clean the directory out quite frequently if you don't meet the design requirements.

 

A large number of editors don't see it as stupid to disallow requests for delisting. There are a few reasons they give but since you would say they were all BS you should have your argument with them. If your solution were to become commonplace they might review that. Or not.

Design requirements? The only design requirements are that you can read what is on the site and navigate to the content. They clean out bad links regularly and sites that don't meet content requirements any longer irregularly.

 

WOW you have content requirements? LOL not in my category you dont. If content is one of the requirements, then since I have more content than any other site in that category or for Las Vegas for that matter. I guess my site should set the new standards.

 

Someone said here that DMOZ does not want to offer removal option from their directory because they can not be sure that the person requesting removal is the owner of the site.

In fact this can be solved easily:

1. Create a form that will allow owners to enter information.
2. When information is submitted, ask the person to create a text file or a html file with a random phrase on their site root.
3. Robozilla or whatever bot DMOZ uses can be set to search for that text/html file a few times in a week and if found, it will remove the site from the index.

Pretty much like what Google Sitemaps system does already.

 

Perhaps that's why no one ever seems to get listed in the first place. I mean how can you possibly expect DMOZ to list your site if "the cannot be sure that the person requesting" a listing, "is the owner of the site"?

Now if that aint' a paradigm.

 

Unless it breaches other DMOZ criteria that would sound right. Not being able to see the notes though I couldn't comment on whether your site has been rejected, the reasons for the rejection, or whether I think it was justified.

Of course there are ways to check but this was only one reason given. You could put an unlinked page on the domain asking an editor to remove it and provide the link in an update request. The main reason as far as I know is one of principle - the site has been made available on the public Internet so anyone can see it. If you don't want anyone to see it or link to it then password protect it and DMOZ will not list / will delist. It is part of not being a website listing service for webmasters - editors trawl a wide variety of sources for sites they think are interesting and useful to surfers and list them for the benefit of others. Only one of those sources, an unreliable one, is webmaster submissions. No permission is required to list the site because it is in the public domain, there is no obligation to remove it whilst it remains interesting and useful as far as editors are concerned. When it comes to personal pages and the webmaster has a free host and no facility to password protect - they just want their relatives on the other side of the world to see their family photos - personally I don't see that it is of wider interest and I don't see the problem with delisting on request.

When it comes to commercial sites the reason for wanting to be delisted is usually one of two things - firstly others want it removed because it breaches some trade or legal provision but that is an entirely different matter and not the owner wanting delisting; second the owner is concerned for their PR and other search engine manipulation techniques that it feels is being undermined by DMOZ. In fact it is being undermined by the search engines themselves continually seeking ways of providing what it feels are unique and accurate results to surfer searches. That isn't a battle DMOZ has any influence on. One day a DMOZ listing might be a boost, the next it might be a detriment, the next it may be both depending on the search engine. It cannot and will not get involved in listing and delisting sites based on what suits the webmaster at any one particular time depending on their marketing requirements. 99% of updates are people wanting keyword stuffing in titles and descriptions. Until recently there were literally only a handful of delisting requests over the years, virtually unheard of, and then only relating to those personal sites. So you can bet that 99% of delisting requests by webmasters now are related to Google practices. DMOZ is not going to be a party to delistings on that basis, it specifically eliminates any search engine manipulation techniques by doing a manual review and description so as not to give any advantage to one webmaster over another.

Bottom line is that whatever the arguments from webmasters DMOZ is not going to start delisting sites on request from webmasters. Gworld's solution may work though interestingly the presence on the site of anti-DMOZ sentiment should not, according to current guidelines, give cause for the site to be removed provided the original content that made it listable is present. I can see there being a large number of editors who would support bluffing their way through - listing 5 million sites with anti-DMOZ sentiments if necessary rather than give way on principle. But of course it wouldn't be 5 millions, it would probably be nearer 5 as few webmasters, even those desperate to get their site delisted, would be willing to prominently display anti-DMOZ messages and so interfere with their product and service messages.

Personally I would be looking carefully at the quality of sites the owners were asking to be removed on marketing grounds. Sites designed with Google PR rather than the surfer in mind quite often have quality issues that might disqualify them in any case. Note that removing the site from DMOZ might have no effect unless you know what the algorythm is doing - how do you know that Google is not using rarely updated clones to get information on a site, or its own copy of RDF dumps past and present.

Ultimately there is only one answer and that is to lobby Google or to discover the circumstances where Google uses DMOZ titles and descriptions and change the site to avoid those circumstances.

 

Fair enough. But what about those sites that have been in DMOZ for ages, and do not exist, nor have they existed for ages? There are a lot of them.

Perhaps a bot that checks sites for availability and nukes them after a set number of pre-defined parameteres are met.

 

Robozilla, and a few new tools, already do that

 

I've heard that before, but there still are a lot of dead links.

 

It has been a while since robozilla ran - in the past it has resulted in tens of thousands of dead links being remove. Whether the new tools have any effect on this remains to be seen.

 

On the other hand, a large number of editors are seen as stupid.

There is no point to argue with stupid people, just force them to do the right thing . Since you suggested that may be some one wouldn't like to change their page in order to be removed (even it works in a very short time), the other option will be to register in RZ and call them every name in the book. They will ban the user, register a new account and call them every name in the book, and so on and so on. It can take couple of days but the site will be removed.

The solution to be sure that the site owner is requesting the removal is very simple. Ask for an email address that must belong to the domain on removal form. Send an email to that address that user must click to confirm removal. This is the way that Alexa and other directories uses to update web site and owner information.

 

I don't think you've got it gworld - the harder you push the more determined many editors will be to stand firm. And any sympathy that might have existed for the webmaster will evaporate instantly as all hands man the barricades. As for stupid I think you are underestimating the combined capacity of editors and AOL technical staff to come up with imaginative solutions. At this point in time there are a small number of editors actually willing to engage and listen to webmaster points including your own. It would be very easy to shut that down instantly and totally ignore everything said externally. What you are advocating amounts to a terror campaign and no-one in their right minds gives way to terrorist demands. If RZ was shut down the majority of editors would jump for joy so that one ain't gonna work - it was getting too lively so most of it was shut down anyway.

It's a red herring achieved by several routes, only needed if removals on request were allowed. And they aren't.

 

While you have no solution to the problem, except more of the same, trust DMOZ, there are some good editors, let's talk and talk and talk and one day, some day, everything or many be only something will be fixed, my suggestion has been shown to be effective and work. I think it took about 3 days in RZ before they removed the site.
By the way, it is not terror, you are exercising your free speech right to explain the stupidity of these people to the public in that forum. It is not, that persons fault if RZ doesn't want to be democratic and deletes the post and ban the user and and force the person to register a new account.