I don't see anything that immediately hits me as being unlistable about the site [but should have looked a bit harder it seems]. Seems original [or not as the case may be - see below] content and maybe plenty of free advice. A single concern - your Directory Submission Chart advises to resubmit to ODP after 3 weeks. Resubmission is not advised since it will overwrite an existing submission and if the editor sorts in date received order then a site that is constantly resubmitted will always be at the bottom of the list. Also the maximum number of categories is more than 1 - if, and only if, a site qualifies for each of the following it can be submitted once to a topical branch, once to a regional category, once to Kids and Teens, and once to every World sub-branch for each language the site is translated into. One thing I don't like about the site is the lack of proper contact details. From http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html - Can you see which person or entity is responsible for it? Does it give enough information about the source for a user to judge its reliability? While we cannot assess the accuracy of every site we list, we can select sites which give verifiable information. For example, the site of a trustworthy business or organization typically displays its official name and address, or includes industry-appropriate information about itself verifiable through a recognized third party. A trustworthy informational site typically gives its authorship and/or sources, as appropriate, and makes clear any commercial sponsorship. The information necessary to verify a site's trustworthiness will vary depending upon the topic and the category. [Added - ah well, he can still read posts even if he is banned]
agreed, when editing it always bugs me when the site has no contact information other than an email adress.
True, but someone who's been banned and continues to violate a site's TOS by getting multiple accounts doesn't seem like someone I'd care to waste my time trying to help. This is the type of SEO professional who gives the whole profession a bad name. Unethical behaviour here warns of unethical elsewhere IMO, kinda reveals a lack of character.
It was too late, I'd already posted the response. Perhaps it might help someone else browsing the thread. Plus he has some misleading information on the site he needs to change.
LOL! This guy already hated DMOZ editors probably, and now you guys got him banned form DP. He will hate you even more now.
I did say nothing immediately hit me as unlistable! If you were doing a full review then yep, that would come up and pretty much make the decision. What is the next stage up from that? Looks like he has plagiarised content rather than original stuff - usually results in a site ban. Banned from DP, banned from DMOZ. Not really his day... This is classic Resource Zone of old when there used to be status reports - someone would come along and beg for an editor to look at their fantastic site, drawing attention to all their mirrors, affiliates, and copied content, getting the whole lot bagged and tagged where if they had just shut up and been patient they might have managed to get it past an inexperienced editor working on their own. Moths to a flame...