Anti Trust on DMOZ

There are so many categories of the DMOZ directory that are 'closed shop' based on the commercial interests of the editors ... would this not breach some US law?

I've been hesitant to mention it, but there is one category that for some reason my top ranking site just isn't allowed into. Despite the substantial time that has gone by and number of updates to the category.

The only reason why I mention it is in some cases dmoz listing has major effect on the serps. and google uses dmoz.

What are your thoughts?

 

I'm not a lawyer, so take this for what it's worth... I think there may be some room there to go for it, but you'd have to have pretty deep pockets to make it happen. Maybe a class action? In the end, it's still thier directory and they are not under any obligation to accept a site's submission. But I do think some legal action would shake up the status quo.

 

I feel there should be at least some type of interaction as to a site's stance in the process. Waiting a year and then relisting if its not there is not a great option.

 

just key their cars

 

Oh dear - web-rover - it seems that due to your threats against editors and your recent multiple submissions - your site is scheduled to be removed from ODP.

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

Please recognize that making the ODP a useful resource requires us to exercise broad editorial discretion in determining the content and structure of the directory. That discretion extends (but is not limited) to what sites to include, where in the directory sites are placed, whether and when to include more than one link to a site, when deep linking is appropriate, and the content of the title and description of the site. In addition, a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time at our sole discretion. You should not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. Please understand that an editor's exercise of discretion may not always treat all submissions equally. You may not always agree with our choices, but we hope you recognize that we do our best to make fair and reasonable decisions.










Woof - just kidding

 

At the end of the day, it is a free directory. They are free to include/exclude any site that they wish.
If you could some how prove that the site was being excluded on discriminatory grounds, then you might have some sort of case against a specific editor.
imho It will only be a matter of time before G drops any added relevancy that being in DMOZ gets.

 

I have no problem waiting, I like that fact that not everyone can get in. Most complaints I have seen are from people that have not played by the rules. I know there is a fear of spamming, that is why there is no interaction as the the status of the process. Not sure if there would be a good way to allow insight into the status.

 

If DMOZ were the only directory in town, you -may- have something, but since its not; you don't. Its a free service, they can choose to let in or not let in anyone they want.

 

Please visit report-abuse DOT dmoz DOT org[1] and give any detailed evidence that you have for this assertion. Please take care to read its FAQ before filing your report.

IMHO, failure to report hard fact abuse can be considered to be condoning it. I don't and neither should you.

meta editor jimnoble

[1] Sorry about the non-clickable link - I don't have enough posts yet to do you the courtesy of providing clickable ones.

 

Jim, I dont think its worth the time or effort to report editor abuse. I reported some months ago by a top level editor and they are still their and the matter is still classed as new. I reported an editor who had listed 5-6 of their own website each one having 10-20 listings. Each of the listings was in categories that the editor could edit in. Specifically the pages had affiliate links, plus a couple of sites were mirrors of each other. I know that you are all volunteers but there is no inspiration to webmasters to report editors when foul play is observed if its going to take 6 months for any resultant action (if there is indeed some).

 

DMOZ is dying a very slooooowww death. Is there a way to put it out of its misery??

It is so heart wrenching to watch it die in such a suffering way. Where is PeT.a when you need them most? This animal is dying a needless death.

 

How many DMOZ threads can we endure?

 

@newbie100

Abuse report reference numbers please.

Failing that, please contact me via my ODP profile at dmoz DOT org / profiles/jimnoble.html

 

at least another 3

 

Geez i believed your for a second

 

ODP meta editors don't need cars; they're issued with company Apaches .

 

Jim, I sent you an email via your ODP profile.

 

In regard to DMOZ abuse system, let me tell you a story ( it is a real story) about when I was designing a software for high school entry for a European country.

One day the man who was responsible for the project in the education department, just run to my office and told me that we have made a big mistake and we have to correct the problem as soon as possible.

I asked him, what was the problem, he said that we have forgotten to make a routine to register the complains from students who were not accepted to the high school of their choice, since this is a democratic country and every one has a right to file a complain against the decision from a government office.

I told him, this is not a problem and we can add the function very fast but then we will need another program to follow up the registered complains and register what has happened with it.

He looked at me, like I was crazy and in a very serious tone answered: No, it is not needed, they HAVE the right to file a complain, but according to law, we have NO OBLIGATION to answer it.

I think this kind of describes the DMOZ abuse system. It can make people feel better but it is of no use.

 

Got it thanks. I'll respond privately once I've checked it out . Could be a few days.

Jim
ODP meta editor jimnoble
ODP Profile

 

You may have something, like someone said, you'd probably have to be filthy rich to even begin to think about messing with DMOZ/AOL. If AOL hasn't gotten sued for all the shitty software they put out yet and all the idiots they let on the net... heh. I doubt they'll lose a dmoz case.

(That's why I love IRC : +b *!*@*.aol.com = peaceful)

Anyway, you are right, google does use DMOZ, I don't know what kind of quantifiable effect it has, but it certainly has some. And just because it's not the only directory doesn't mean they can show extreme favoritism, and block competitors sites. Especially when people go to DMOZ under the impression that it IS an "open" directory for which anyone can apply and be judged under the same rules. It's false advertisement... it should be the "open for me and my friends directory project". You should put up a parody, I would laugh.

It's like applying for a driver's license, you take the test, they send you home and say "wait... forever, you'll get one if you get one." And you don't know if they didn't like you because you sucked on the test or because you are black, there's no oversight, no statistics, nothing that shows they are impartial or even remotely fair, or "open" at all. I think that's the way they like it. =) I plan on applying soon, as soon as I finish my third site, so I can put all my own sites on my application, I know that will impress them greatly!


Jim, It's amazing how many editors smart off in the resource-zone yet have their own sites listed, and that's just the ones not trying to hide it. You only have to look around for 5 minutes to see why certain editors are editing certain categories... since when does that raise brows over at dmoz?