I'll let you know about the sites they not only come from our country. China and Thailand has the best recipe. But hey don't get mad we grew up on those. Though I can't do that here in the US. I'll let your dog pass though.
Were taking a break from the pie throwing. Wanna join ? This is how it works. Though we sling a shot and vice versa we eat barbecue together. How about that ?
I tried but I can't do it. Seriously, brizzie is telling you the truth when he says travel sites are hard. It takes a specialist. (wondering why you won't eat pig but you'll eat dog)
Hmmm, how did I know that wasn't going to go down too well. I could have given you meaningless platitudes that help no-one but give you an ego boost. Sorry I chose not to. I didn't say the site was an affiliate, I said the flight offerings were considered as such. Call it link exchange if you want, it has the same meaning from a DMOZ angle. If you were a general travel agent it would probably be a killer, but since you offer tours it doesn't destroy it for a DMOZ listing, it only means that the flight services are excluded. It also means that far more care is taken over the other content - it made me look deeper into the tour offerings rather than accept them on face value as being *your* tours. If they had been your tours then it would make you a tour operator rather than a travel agent and it would mean the vast bulk of your site truly was unique and a very valuable addition - the flight affiliation/link exchange would not matter a jot. So then we look at the tours, and, as you accept, the exact same tours with the exact same brochure appears on other websites. So what do you offer that is unique in any way? Nothing that I can see. And the basic principle of DMOZ is the listing of unique content. It is a problem that many travel agents have. The way to deal with this effectively, as Annie suggested, is the inclusion of your own take on the tours. Take an itinerary, rewrite it in your own words, give your own personal opinion of those tours, rate them, add information only you know and only your site contains. In other words customise the content to make it unique and more valuable than other sellers of the same tours. And put that at the top of the content so it is immediately obvious. Had you done that then I don't think I would have hesitated to list the site. But instead, by simply reproducing text others had written, you created sufficient doubt that I don't think I would have listed it. Literally you have 5-10 minutes tops to prove to a reviewing editor that the site is unique and if it fails simple tests there are thousands more waiting offering the same things. Some of those might have that unique twist that makes an editor hit the list button. What I am saying should not make you think about your site from the perspective of getting a DMOZ listing but since I looked at the site as a potential consumer (as all good editors should do) I was looking for your edge, what you do that no-one else does, your unique selling point. And it wasn't there, despite a high quality site design that is impressive. So it is really a consumer review. I look at your site, I look at others on the same theme, I see nothing that makes me want to book with you. When I travel I do like to use tour agents such as yourself - a hotel and a beach would bore me rigid. As a potential customer you lost me though. The tour agent I trust tells me they went on the tour themselves, this is what was good, even this is what wasn't so good, an honest appraisal I can believe. In some ways, on the surface, your site gives what feels like a personally written itinerary - it is good stuff. Until you Google text and find out is isn't personal but very well written blurb - I felt cheated personally. I thought that the tours were your tours, there was nothing to indicate otherwise. The tour I tested and found the same wording for on another site told me who the tour operator actually was and gave me some information on them - to me their take sounded far more honest and had I been interested in buying the tour that competitor of yours would have got the business. They had the extra information your site was lacking. I would have listed their version not yours as it was more complete but I have to say their presentation was nowhere near your standard. A review by an experienced editor, if done properly, gives you an extremely valuable consumer test. The editor is unlikely to be a travel or tour agent but they will almost certainly have used their services. They will also have reviewed tens of thousands of websites. The judgement is one from a hardened and savvy potential customer and it does not take into account how fancy your design is or your marketing hype. You can either ignore my assessment of the site, of why I would not buy your services based on your site, or use it to improve the site and maybe give you an edge over your competitors that will increase the business you do win. I repeat, I was impressed with the site and felt let down when I discovered the text was not all your own work. Before I became an editor I had a web site I wanted to get listed in DMOZ - based on a hobby and passion of mine. I thought I had a great site. I then went through the guidelines about unique content - must be unique and lots of it - looked at the sites already listed (the best of them not the average), and realised that it was nowhere near good enough. I went through them all to discover what these sites did not have and that I had the knowledge to provide. I researched and wrote an article no-one else had because I wrote it. I wanted to include Amazon links to relevant books but instead of just listing the books I appraised them honestly, good and bad points, if it was pricey I would say so, if it was a thin tome with poor illustrations I would say so. Etc. The end result was something entirely unique that does not exist anywhere else on the Internet, i.e. emminently listable, impossible to reject. In the longer term it also boosted the Google PR of the site considerably. So go back to your site, build on an excellent and easy to use design, and make sure you don't lose any more potential customers.
OK lets go with Travel Guides with its Description : IF Travel Smart would be listable Travel Guides - Should purposely guide travellers through their point of destination with its UNIQUE content, places of interest, hotel, business, sight seeing and travel tips. In short its a travellers information. Travel Smart - Main purpose is to sell tickets and make DINERO and bookings in hotels which most online agents make their cash through commission bookings same as airfare. If this is listable then it should go to Travel Agents category as it does not fully informs travellers. But I doubt the affiliates of this sites should be listable. Travel guide patterned with Wow Philippines, Best of the Philippines, Changing Money These are Travel guides samples that would be usable to the visitor - surfer. P.S. I don't eat Miss Piggy because of religious belief. I only eat doggie when I go on vacation.
Had my great-grandfather not been converted a hundred years ago I may have been in the same position but then would have missed out on the humble (very) crispy bacon sandwich, a culinary delight unsurpassed by anything else. But there must be a hereditary gene somewhere as nothing on this earth could make me eat any other form of Miss Piggy. On topic... Wow Philippines - this is the national official site and would always be listed. But the version that is listed is a mirror of tourism.gov.ph Best of the Philippines - looks good to me. How to Change Money in the Philippines - looks weak to me, too little content. Travel Smart - looked to me to be a primary agent who offers affiliate status to others, and would therefore be listable. It is a site that is part of infophil.com. You have to click about a bit but eventually you actually uncover what it really is. It is an affiliate itself of one of the most notorious affiliate operators - travelnow.com. It is the tiny FAQ link, just above the feedback form, on the contact page. Infophil is an IT company not a travel agency, which should be the clue that something is not right. You just have to look hard enough.
Thanks brizzie, I'll use your notes to try and learn something. You're a good mentor even in retirement.
Your right about Wow Philippines. How to change Money - Though it has little and weak content would immediate give an idea of status of changing money in our country. In Asia many use the blackmarket to change their money because of high exchange rates but there travellers should beware of this as they count very quick and won't realize they count 1 bill in double. I know the deal. Am from the hood. Nice catch there on Travel Smart I already knew but have to wait for confirmation and I am already impatient. P.S. Try the Crispy Turkey Bacon as substitute for BLT Sandwich with Mayo and Mustard with splash of Tabasco.
I thought long and hard about whether I should reveal the simple tricks of how to identify travel affiliates as it might give the spammers the knowledge of how to beat those checks. But most affiliate operators are dim, don't bother reading this sort of forum, and the more people that are aware the more can deal with them. The battles are being lost at the moment so it can't do any more harm. As I identify them from now on I will try and explain exactly how I identified the affiliate nature. I am glad someone is taking an interest - the skills are being lost!
Nah. Canadian maple smoked piggy meat. No mayo. No mustard. No tabasco. No nothing except top quality bacon in a fresh and still warm baguette. There is no substitute. Promise. Convert and find out.
Thanks brizzie. Now I rest my case and move to the next Travel Site. Now Annie has a new weapon to shoot the infested Travel categories. Sounds mouth watering. In the middle ages when the English tried and occupied the Middle East they were unsuccesful. Nah, Allah Akhbat.
Southeast Asia - Checked only at Random Dragon Travel - has 2 listings same site. Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia Travel Forum - GoDaddy.com Philippine Travel - Copied Content with links to porn Travel Guides- Travel Forum.org - Spammer Exploration Borneo Tours - Tour operator specializing in the Island of Borneo. Offers tours to Sabah and Sarawak in Mayaysia and to Kalimantan in Indonesia. (site not working )
It;s not that your review of the site doesnt go down too well it's the simple fact that double standards are rife in DMOZ. Just because YOU seek out 'duplicate'(?) content clearly other editors do not. Many of the equitour competitors are listed in DMOZ with 'duplicate' content! 'Duplicate' simply because they are offering the same packages! You will also find in DMOZ a site that is listed by exactly the same name as one of my clients and they dont even trade under that name. The name isnt even mentioned in their site they use it for marketing againgst my client! To be honest with you, this isnt the first time I have had an issue with DMOZ and it probably wont be the last.
Not intentionally. The reasons that it may look that way become clearer when you consider that many, many different humans are working on the directory and we all have different knowledge, experience, and even native languages. Clearly other editors do 'try' to weed out duplicate content; clearly less experienced editors will not be as successful at finding duplicate content as highly experienced editors. This is normal in anything that humans do, it's nothing sinister. Who can deny that experience is valuable? Again, because of the experience factor this is probably true. You could help us (and your clients) by giving us the URLs so we can check them out and remove the ones that don't belong. Or you can be angry while you wait for an experienced editor to go edit in the category they reside in, and then hopefully check for affiliations, and hopefully have enough knowledge to actually find the affiliations so they are removed. If this is true and you make us aware of it and we choose to ignore the facts then it's understandable that you'd be angry. However, since you clearly haven't given us the URL to the site you're complaining about there's no way for us to investigate it. You know the details, we don't. It's your client; clearly it's your responsibility to serve your client to the best of your ability. Choosing to come to a forum to rant and rave at editors is clearly not going to help your client. On the other hand, providing details to correct the situation would help your client. Having seen how you communicate I don't doubt it. Maybe you should try to figure out why you have these issues so you can learn how serve your clients more effectively in the future. Life is about choices, my friend. Your anger will hurt you more than it will hurt anyone here. Why do that to yourself?
I can understand the frustration of webmasters who see whole categories of spam that are far more obvious than this one in question. And the inconsistency in treatment by editors. This is why I think it is a good idea for all travel services sites to be dealt with by a specialist group of editors who know what they are looking for. I got into it by editing in Regional in very touristy locations, and I enjoyed a couple of years of virtual vacations but when I started looking at US city travel services I was absolutely appalled. Is this a site you are saying belongs to a meta editor? If so can you tell me how you made the connection? I can understand how an editor of any level would miss the travelnow affiliation and list it. But obviously the owner knows that it is an affiliate and if the owner is an editor it is cut and dried abuse.
Annie, Annie, Annie............. I sense your irony (for those who suggest I dont!) Perhaps as you say there is nothing sinister going on in DMOZ other than the frailties and faults of humankind. The frailties of humankind are well documented with the downfall of many empires through history. Is this to be the fate of DMOZ? Unfortunately I am not about to start a war between competitors by reporting misuse of names within website titles. It should be the experienced editors at DMOZ to find these blatantly obvious misrepresentations (takes about 3 seconds). You are absolutely right, it is my job to serve my clients to the best of my abilities. That goes without saying. Isnt it the job of editors to serve submitted sites to the best of their abilities? And before you come back with "We do", those abilities are clearly lacking and should the powers that be in DMOZ cull editors that are simply not performing? Senior or otherwise.
What have you done, Arcos, other then to complain that others are not doing what you think they should do?
OK here is a travel agent listed that is a perfect example of an independent travel agent that has turned their website into an affiliate magnet. This one takes a slightly different approach to many others. polaristravel.com There is no reason to doubt they are a real life actual travel agent as they have a street address and invite personal callers. But DMOZ is only interested in the integrity of the website, not whether an affiliate site belongs to a legitimate company that offers their own services to personal callers - it is the website only that counts. The actual content on the index page is a small amount of blurb about the agency. Nothing more than an advert that you would think twice about listing - certainly I've seen plenty of sites with more that metas and above have deemed adverts not worthy of listing. But this site has services offered online so we are also judging those services. When you hover over the links on the assorted adverts all bar one appear to go to an internal page rather than being an affiliate link. Nothing unusual about a travel agent offering those products. The exception is the Sandals advert which has a clear referral link marking it out as an affiliate. The first page I clicked was the Budget page. I expected to see information on Budget and the Polaris service relating to Budget. But I have my browser set to prompt for acceptance of cookies and I was surprised to see it asking me to accept budget.com cookies. When the page loaded I was surprised to see a Budget website page framed within the Polaris one. Same thing with Funjet, Apple, and the travel insurance page. Disney was a broken link. Royal Caribbean some form of holding page. So in all you have a bit of an advert for the travel agency themselves plus nothing else but affiliate links. It is, unfortunately, typical of the industry as independent agencies turn their sites into affiliates. This is the only travel agent listed in that locality and it is, from a DMOZ perspective, spam. Here is another one. althams.co.uk - I know this agency - they operate around my area and you see their shops on the street, they have 30 of them. It wouldn't occur to me that their website was affiliate loaded. But it is and it is slightly more conventional in its approach. Of the service options available on the left the cruise page and the rail travel pages are their own though the cruise offerings are pretty sparse. UK breaks is a Superbreaks affiliate. Click and it will take you to the Superbreaks website with no pretense of it being Althams. The Flight search and the Holiday search are both sabsconsumer.com affiliate links. When you click and enter search data the Address window clearly shows the word affiliate in the URL, the code used to identify the referrer. On the right is an oceanvillage link and a suncars affiliate. At the bottom of the page is another affiliate link for seligo.com from the link labelled accommodation only. Hover over it and you can see the affiliate referral code. So unless you want a rail pass or a choice of 4 cruise breaks every other service on the site is an affiliate service. Again it doesn't matter a jot that the agency is legitimate and has real branches on real streets - I can testify they are and they do. What counts in DMOZ terms is what the website is, and the website is blatently an affiliate site. The consumer thinks they are booking with Althams, a name they think they can trust but they are in fact booking direct with a consolidator or supplier and Althams are doing nothing but passively supplying the web space.