I think that theory wouldn't apply for this case. This domain was registered 02-Oct-1996. Furthermore, the entries match the titles of the targeted pages. Which makes clear the editor listing that was aware about the content.
I`m pretty sure they can say it's linkrot ... actually anything what they will say they have right and it's considered true and fully truth since they know better than '' outsiders '' and '' enemies ''
hahaha, you are right. Whenever we think they are doing something wrong. We have some sort of misconception about the universe.
Wow ...you're right. 43 categories. Well but these guys pass the 3 point "easy" test for inclusion in dmoz listed above: Page rank - 4 Alexa Rank - 70193 Google indexed pages - 4030 (not a big deal) Yahoo Link Domain - 9167 (good) etc. Maybe somebody at dmoz liked the Occult Store so much that finally decided to included in 43 different categories. What so suspicious here?
Nothing, DMOZ does not exist for webmasters to get sites listed, it is not a listing service. A listing service would only have 1 entry per site, or maybe 2, never 43
Well, I'm not into esoterism really. This could be the better site in the area and it could deserve to be listed. The problem is, whenever a user comes here or to resource-drone asking why his site was rejected, never-listed or removed he gets a bunch of excuses in the form of different rules listed in DMOZ guidelines. At the same time, DMOZ is full of site "violating" these rules. It's only natural we ask ourselves what's happening here. Is there another hidden rule indicating which sites should the first rules be applied to. I mean, it's obvious this guidelines doesn't apply to all sites.
Lucky mojo is owned by an editor of both DMOZ and WIKI... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=luckymojo.com&go=Go Check out how many times they mention their site on there... 56 is you are too lazy to clickety... As for the ODP, here are the owners of the site with 40+ deeplinks http://www.dmoz.org/profiles/yronwode.html and http://www.dmoz.org/profiles/boboroshi.html
Our beloved boboroshi [nagasiva yronwode] has this site "SatanService.org" with two listings. One of them pointing deep inside the site. http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=SatanService.org
Not really... it's clear that each and every time something like this is brought up the ODP editors ALL stop posting. It's been almost two months now, and it's clear that the editors feel that the affiliated site is well worth being a part of the ODP as it's still there (35 times). And yet the editors keep coming in to other threads and telling us webmasters that WE have to follow the guidelines, when it's clear that they have no regard for them what-so-ever...
Unfortunately for the web dev community you are right. No matter how many proofs we find that DMOZ is not the best managed directory, it's editors will keep repeating the same mantra and will try to intimidate anybody who try to oppose them openly.
Looked at this one when this thread first started... the editors (husband/wife) are apparently both pre-2002 exes per some posts readily available to anyone doing a little Google search. Not my call to make, but if it were I'd say they appeared to be using Dmoz to create a site-map of several sites they own, and would probably take 'em down to their base URL at most. That said, it isn't my problem (I dont edit the place/ manage the place/ own the place)... and I get amazed how many people think it somehow makes their life better if they find an example where someone cheated someone else's system. If they zap any or all of those tomorrow I dont see that it'll do anything for any sites of those posting here, but hey,whatever makes you happy. For anyone that suggests this disproves anyones claims that dmoz never has such issues... I'd suggest re-reading and trying to find a post where I've made such a claim. Personally I'd be a little surprised to see an editor defend those listings... doesnt look like something that was done with full knowledge of anyone but the guys that did it. Just old crap that needs to be cleaned up.
In this case silence seems to be the editors approval, as it's clear the site was not automatically listed on a staff level As for it being "old crap" I wonder if the topix listings predate it... which would make that even older crap...as both sites still have more deep links then most webmasters can ever hope to get, then that says a lot about who can and who can't get such deep links. Was it a matter of mass editor approval? Why should it be... but it is another sign that it's more common then the ODP would like people to know. I'll have to look for some more examples...
OK... so the owners came to an agreement with the founder. Whooptydo. They own the damned thing, they can make those decisions. Grow up. The site this thread is about looks like (IMO) an example of a cleanup needed. Topix is just a matter of you not liking a decision that isnt yours to decide.
You can slice it any way you want to, but explain how it's WITHIN the guidelines. If one site is bad from the top, that explains A LOT about the sites below it. I suspect that the owners of Lucky Mojo and other sites are just following the examples of the owners and founders... what is good for the goose is good for the gander....right? So if these sites are crap that need to be cleaned out, and topix is not, then what set of guidelines do we follow? I certainly do not see a clause in the documentation that says "AOL has the right to list any damned thing they want too" but by example I do see that "editors most certainly can list their sites as often as they wish"...and I see that example from the owners and founders down to the lowliest of editors... after all, that is what I was, and me listing my own site is something that you have pointed out time and time again (which, according to your post I just quoted wasn't any of your business).
You added six sites to a directory a couple of years ago and now you think you have the knowledge to tell them how to run it? Get a life. Go start your own and run it however you want.
I am not telling them how to run it, I'm just saying that they have a single site that breaks nearly every guideline they have set forth, the very guidelines they expect everyone else to read and follow. I'm not asking them to do anything other then to put the end user first, which they are most certainly NOT doing. besides, what does my edit count have to do with ANYTHING? My site is within the ODP because someone else put it there... thanks to YOU removing it, me listing it is no longer an issue, as it is no longer a matter of me listing it. Besides, are you saying that my site, at the time it was listed broke ANY of the guidelines? it was NOT a deep link, it was an established site with many threads and posts and several active members... whereas, the topix site is nearly all syndicated material which breaks the cardinal rule of UNIQUE CONTENT... so tell me again about my edit count. As accordingly the ONLY sites in the ODP that I put there are NOT my own. And even then, so what... if I listed 6 sites and one of them was mine, if that means anything by ratio, then tell me, what are skrenta's total counts, as I assume he has 5 times the edits to counter his nearly TWENTY THOUSAND deep links... and remember, deeplinks are NOT the rule, they are the exception...so tell me how did I treat my site any differently? Seriously, that argument does not hold any water in this debate...as my site was well within the guidelines, and if it was not, then it would have been removed shortly after it was put in.
There's not a "debate"... I just pointed out that you don't have any idea how to run a directory and you have spent about 2 years here obsessing about how someone should run theirs. No debate to that. You simply cant tell the difference between simple abuse that needs to be fixed and an owners decision to approve a widespread deeplink. You can bitch about that til hell freezes over, but if AOL is paying for the servers they can deeplink to static JPGs of Donald Duck if they want. Why it should concern you so terribly (this thread isnt about Topix) is an issue you might take up with a medical professional.
hold on cowboy ... tough the directory it's free and moderated / edited by the volunteer editors who was supposed to do that just from passion and other garbage's what they still keep promoting , now you came and tell us the directory it's actually at the AOL discretion what they list and how they list ? .... I don't know about others but I`m bit confused