Since sidjf thinks that it is nothing wrong with these pages as long as they have pictures, in this web site you can find programs that not only make hundreds of DOORWAY pages for you but it can also be configured to automatically upload to your server and submit to DMOZ as these programs do with other porn links web sites. I think the cheapest programs costs only $2.99. adultwebmastersonline(.)com/software/software-software(.)_php Sidjf; If for some reason DP member's "sites" doesn't get included in DMOZ, can they PM you about their "sites" status check? Love and hug, bro.
They can if they want, but they will most likely be ignored just like every other webmaster that tries to contact me about a listing. Also, if the sites are of low enough quality and enough submissions are sent in, it can and will still be considered spam - so, even though gworld is only suggesting this to make a point - I wouldn't advise doing it as it may jeopardize your listings... gworld - I understand the point you are making. However, it is far more complex than how you are selling it. You are describing spamming the directory - that would play in as a factor as to whether the sites got listed or not. On the other hand, the URL that sparked this only had a few listings I believe. That's probably not spam (but could be as I'm not sure how many tiems they submitted).
Can there be any lower quality than the "sites" (DOORWAY) pages already listed? I think you can find more interesting pictures for both Men and Women in Men's Health magazine or GQ than what is listed in DMOZ. Why is it spamming? didn't you post yourself in this thread that multiple submission in adult section is not spamming? I think the URL discussed and couple of it's sneaky redirects had about 200 links in DMOZ, but I am sure most people here will be happy with 100 or even 50. I will all be very interested and all ears to hear you explain for me what you mean by "far more complex"? I don't find anything remotely complex with this since for all practical purposes DMOZ is just another porn link (DOORWAY page) directory (TGP) but with less quality than proper ones.
Deeplinks are allowed in Adult/Image_Galleries, so submitting your sites is not spam. Having an automated system submit hundreds of low quality sites is spam - even if the sites are listable. It's really a quite simple concept.
How will you know? These programs not only can fill forms, read picture generators that DMOZ doesn't have but also can do it on time schedule and through different proxies. Let's not argue, I think you know and I know that this whole thing with gallery images is just a total nonsense and serves nobody interest, except you know who. Love and Hug, bro.
lol, it really is a silly arguement since we both agree that the sites should not be listed. We just disagree as to why they should not be listed... Either way - I think we both agree that the ODP is better off without these types of sites.
I think we are agreeing too much, especially you being a DMOZ editor. It just doesn't sound right. To make it more clear, let's say that we both agree that DOORWAY pages should not be listed.
Because there are so many DMOZ editors reading this thread, let's have a silent poll and all the DMOZ editors and former editors who think DMOZ should remove child porn, pedophile sites and DOORWAY pages please raise your hand. If there is any editor who thinks DMOZ should not do this then please enlighten us with your views. I think, it is obvious that the majority of DMOZ editors agree with this, so it will be interesting to see if DMOZ will act according to the will of it's editors (volunteers) or for some unknown reasons decides that the will and opinion of it is members is of no value and it should continue as nothing has happened.
The editors are not going to do much, they have already admitted that a lot of these sites are their own sites. But AOL will do something
It will be interesting indeed. IMO, if a poll were taken of all ODP editors, there would be a landslide victory in favor of removing the sites.
If you had any clue what you were talking about in regards to this...it would be scary. Even if an editor owned these pedo sites, do you see a lot of money being made off of them? And if AOL were going to step in, don't you think they would have by now?
May be you should suggest it in DMOZ. I just find it very puzzling that an organization that is based on free volunteer work of it's members and stated social responsibility policy; to be so resistant to democratic decision making process.
Sure, AOL is going to fire a lot of the top editors and administrators at DMOZ for letting this shit happen in the first place, then they will close the adult section of the directory because of potential legal and public relations problems, this issue is way over the heads of editors at DMOZ.
And when they don't? Then what are you going to say? Have you noticed any changes on the pages of the ODP within the last week? Says alot about what AOL thinks about ODP, at least it does IMO.
I am confused about what you mean. Do you mean that AOL wants the pedophile sites and DOORWAY porn affiliate pages in DMOZ or do you mean that AOL doesn't give shit about DMOZ? More important, what is your opinion, do you think that pedophile chat rooms and porn DOORWAY pages are good for DMOZ or not?
You failed to address the two questions directed at you. I'm sure this was just an oversight on your part. Maybe I already did a long time ago.
In my personal opinion, no, pedophile chatrooms are not good for the ODP, nor are they good for the internet in general and society as a whole. I think we are still in some disagreement about what exactly is and is not a porn DOORWAY. But we both agree that that type of site should not be in the ODP (for different reasons).
Let me guess, it wasn't a welcomed suggestion, was it? sidjf I understood your opinion that you don't approve of pedophile sites and DOORWAY pages, I was just wondering about imocr and the last cryptic post, I got an impression that imocr doesn't agree with us but maybe I am wrong.