Doesn't this just piss you off?

Error of judgement? It used to be better than it was when the listings were listed? Someone was interested in car photos and went over the top? That someone wasn't interested in real estate or e-cards so listing those deeplinks would make no difference at all to whether a real estate or e-cards site was listed or not.

If it fits all the criteria for listing then it will be listed... one day... but explain why editors should divert from whatever other editing priorities they have to go review your site? They have hundreds of millions of sites to choose from to review next.

I know of a real estate site I listed with an average of 8-12 photos per home, plus a location map, plus details of local taxes, plus a lot more - pages and pages of information on each property. I found it by browsing on Google and listed it independently of it being submitted I was that impressed. Am I going to point you at it? No - poor chap doesn't need hundreds of people using up his bandwidth when they are not interested in his property. But that is the secret of getting a listing in a highly competitive market - make sure an editor who is interested in listing real estate sites finds it no matter what method of site selection they use - the pools of suggested sites on that subject are so clogged as to be more or less useless as a method of catching an editor's eye. Same with e-cards.

 

You can't blackmail editors like that - all they will do is get defensive if the site meets the guidelines, which is may well do (just) and there is no evidence of abuse (which there doesn't appear to be). Just report it, publicly if you want, and be patient - editors have a thousand other things to do with their time - it could take a month or more, they are unlikely to respond one way or another, if a senior editor does see it as a quality control issue they will quietly remove the listings - simple. But it won't be a top priority and making a mountain out of a molehill won't speed the process up.

 

I was pointing out the fact that in my market and even this sites market you mention, there is not another one out there that has as much information/content as this new one of mine. As for the 8 to 12 photos what does this matter if there are only say 50 homes. I have over 15,000 homes listed on my new site. Most Realtor associations in the US only allow 8 or less photos per property on their MLS system. With my own personal listings I could add 100 photos per property if I choose to. As for the location maps those are easy to place for each property and I have those as well for over 15k in listings...this is not about his site or mine this is about the fact that DMOZ doesnt list the best sites, they list sites of friends and editors or other sites that are not expected to compete with their own or friends.

You found maybe a site but I dont think compared to what I have seen of what editors have listed in my market for sites this site is any better than them, and those sites listed in my market most of them dont offer anything of value to be listed. As for the bandwidth issue, lol my site alone so far this month has seen over 200mb of BW used by just google, yahoo and MSN bots, the site as a whole has seen over 2GB of bandwidth used this month so far.

Just like computers, horses, cars and so on it takes an editor that is familar with these industries and in my opinion should be someone within that industry to edit, but we all get most of the time someone who has some computer knowledge and very little knowledge of that industry editing that category so therefore the listings in most of these highly competitive fields are junk. If editors really knew anything say as an example real estate, you wouldnt see some of the listings I have seen listed.

Once again using real estate lets look at all the Advanced Access real estate sites listed. Those sites have at least 30% or higher of the same content and design but yet it seems there are quite a few of those sites listed. Looking at their navigation their buyers sections, schools, sellers sections, cost of living sections and real estate terms they all contain the same content but yet there are several of those type sites listed within DMOZ, why is that? DMOZ has always stated it wants unique content.

As for those other sites in my market, there is NOT a SINGLE one that can compete with this new one of mine for content, information offered and the most important factor for a real estate site is the ability to search for property with valuable info pertaining to that property, not just a contact form or little information offered on neighborhoods.

The point to all this is that DMOZ is a site for editors by editors and did I mention it is only for Editors

 

Now here's a great illustration of how it could/should be changed for the better.

On the submission/suggestion form why is there not a form field to allow this kind of detail to be provided?

I don't know shit about real estate in las vegas but any moron should be able to read the legitimacy for the argument for inclusion in the above post. the submission form should allow peolpe to provide this information.

Also, the term "Open" should really not be applied to DMOZ. It is a decidedly closed system. Submitters cannot see the status of the inclusion request, cannot see reasons they were denied, cannot see the actions of individuals editors, etc., etc. It's just a horrible system. I am not condemning all the people who devote their time to it. I'm optimistic that most are well-intentioned. But the corrupt editors (and there are many) combined with the closed door policy makes for a lousy end product.

 

That's OK then - are you that interested in selling real estate to editors?

If only real estate editors edited real estate categories then there would be no end of accusations of bias and corruption. That real estate agents edit poodle trimming categories and poodle trimmers edit real estate categories helps to prevent conflicts of interest. What you suggest - that sellers of the information edit the categories - is in direct conflict with basic DMOZ concepts which are aimed at buyers of the information deciding what is worthy or not. Most people buy property at some point - most people are good judges of whether a real estate site is of use to them or not. But hey, sometimes they make a mistake. The answer for what the industry wants is for industry organisations to produce their own directory and hawk it to Google and the others as an alternative for the their directory source. Same with poodle trimmers if they have a problem with real estate agents editing their DMOZ categories.

 

Just because you buy property doesnt mean you know anything about real estate websites. This statement shows what little you know about real estate. Most people who buy real estate look at an average of 8 sites before their decision to use an agent from a particular website. So how does this make an editor who has purchased real estate an expert on what consumers want to see? Most consumers not all but most are only interested in 5 things, 1. can I search for properties, 2. are their photos of the property, 3. are there photos of the city, 4. maps, 5. how can I contact the agent from the site. In that order.

The sites listed and I can only speak to real estate sites in DMOZ, most of them have no reason or benefit to being in the directory, yet we see that some editor has placed them there even though they dont meet ODP guidelines. My opinions of what should and should not be placed in DMOZ comes from my own experiences with the thousands of real estate clients I have dealt with over my time in this profession and my viewing thousands of real estate websites. No editor can compete with the knowledge I have of these types of consumers looking for this type of product and the feedback I have received based on what they want to see within real estate sites to better serve their needs. If ODP is for consumers then I could only imagine that you would want sites listed that consumers would find useful.

To solve your problem of abuse by allowing people from these industries to edit, you have guidelines for sites inclusion if those submitted sites meet those guidelines they must be included in DMOZ, no ifs ands or buts. If during a quality assurance review you find these guidelines have not been followed then you remove that editor. It cant be any worse than the corruption within DMOZ now. I would also suggest that sites that are declined are given reason as to why, unless DMOZ doesnt want them to have them for fear of being exposed.

Editors state all the time they want a directory that is useful to the general public, yet within the real estate listings I see less than 15% of the sites offering valuable information to the public. So this leads me to conclude that DMOZ is a directory for editors benefit and created for editors benefit not the general public.

 

I was a pretty typical Regional editor (where real estate sites are listed). I reviewed hundreds, maybe thousands, of real estate websites, not just 8. Substitute photos of the city for a profile of the agent and you about have what every Regional editor looks for to decide whether a real estate site is good enough. I might as well be a poodle trimmer for all I know about being a real estate agent. But I certainly know what makes for a good real estate site, and so do the vast majority of editors who list real estate sites.

Your arrogance is astounding since you have no clue as to the qualifications of editors, some of whom are indeed real estate agents and happily share their industry knowledge with other editors on request.

The Real Estate guidelines are possibly the most precise and well written of all DMOZ guidelines. A site that meets the criteria will be listed and editors who reject listable sites are subject to abuse proceedings. But there is no timespan on when a site might be reviewed because no-one directs any editor's priorities, that will never change.

We are clearly looking at two entirely different directories or have different definitions of what is valuable information. But you are entitled to your opinion and to arrive at your own conclusions. That is the wonderful thing about living in democracies, they cater for all shades of opinion. If your opinion is that DMOZ offers no value to you then I don't think DMOZ will shed any tears over that.

 

26 listings from a domain is nothing....
http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=ign.com&all=yes

1,566 listings!!!!

I even got some sites with five or six pages each indexed. Oh wait, I added those listings four years ago!! Now THATS abuse!!!

 

If this is the case then why are there so many sites listed that dont meet those? Also if this is the case then I have about 4 sites in different cities throughout the US that should be listed and they are not, this does not include my new site which is better than anything listed in the Las Vegas category. You may say it arrogance but I say this new site will set the standards for real estate agent sites in the future with the amount of content, information and tools offered to consumers to better serve their needs for getting the information that is needed for their next sell or purchase.

I have seen the listings within several of your real estate categories, that is what I base my statements on. If some of your editors are real estate agents themselves then the listings should be better than what they are IMO. I can show several examples of sites that dont meet your guidelines or offer unique content and information but yet they are listed. What does this say about those editors listing the sites.

Anyone can be a salesman ( Real Estate Agent ) but very few truly understand what the general public is asking for or how to present it to them. I know real estate agents that have # 1 websites and receive over 4000 leads per month but dont convert anything. This tells me that these agents lack personal skills to communicate with their clients. I relate this to what you said, you have real estate agents that are editors and offer advice all the time to other editors. Anyone can offer advice but this does not mean that advice is solid.

No we are looking at the same directory but you are looking at it through what benefits the editor not the general public. I look at the sites and ask myself how does this site benefit the public. With the example I gave of Advanced Access sites being 30% or more of the same content. I would be curious to see how many of those sites are listed within DMOZ. If DMOZ is about unique content and information, where do these sites benefit the general public and why would your expert real estate agents that are editors be offering the advice that sites like this should be listed, they are nothing more than templates with the same content and design from Advanced access, real estate ABCs and their other vendors for information.

QUOTE FROM DMOZ GUIDELINES

Whether this new site gets listed in DMOZ or not does not matter but through my knowledge of the real estate listings in DMOZ I feel this is a way I can expose ODP as being a directory created by editors for editors and to benefit only editors. There is a pattern to all this madness but someone will expose it, it is only a matter of time.

You were right about one thing you mentioned or at least I believe it was you. Someone should create an industry human edited real estate directory and pitch it to the search engines since real estate seems to be one of the more app sections within DMOZ to see some form of corruption.

 

I got that from the status check I made for the abuse report I filed. I checked, and sure enough it looks like the site was REMOVED from every single category it was entered into.

Wow, nice job.

 

It's very strange that you can see that it was removed, since it still shows as being listed when I go to to http://dmoz.org/Recreation/Autos/Image_Galleries/

You are however right, and it will be disappearing in a day or two.

 

rofl........i got a nice email from the editor of my section hinting towards their paypal account.

not sure if it was a joke or not, or someone else. but it was DAMN timely.

 

I stand corrected, it is still listed in it's top level category but all the deep links have been removed.

 

Its amazing what can happen when numerous people find something like this in DMOZ and make it public knowledge, I would venture to guess though that the editor who listed it multiple times is going wow, guess paypal will be doing a reverse charge on my account

 

The keyword is guess - and you guessed wrong, since several different editors listed different pages at different times.

 

Please send the information about this person to DMOZ-abuse, or PM me with the information. (please include all heading information from the email).
If this was from a DMOZ editor (and not a joke from someone) his time as an editor must and will be ended.

 

I very much doubt that the metas who processed the abuse report (for which thanks BTW) were even aware of this thread.

 

I would say you are wrong. How long has that site been listed so deep? Now its gone or at least the deep links are. Dont fool yourself Jim, it was because of this thread. This is not the RZ and statements such as that dont fly here.

So are you saying that there was more than one editor trying to make a buck off this spammy site by deep linking it?