More fun with DMOZ.

These are not "doorway and affiliate" sites by the dmoz definition knucklehead, only by your definition. If you want to be an editor you really should learn what the guidelines actually say.

 

Interesting. First these are doorway pages but when I mention DMOZ adult guideline then these are not "affiliate doorway" pages.

What is the definition of "doorway and affiliate" site by DMOZ adult editors?
Any site that doesn't belong to them?

"More sophisticated doorway pages, called Content Rich Doorways, are designed to gain high placement in search results without utilizing redirection. They incorporate at least a minimum amount of design and navigation similar to the rest of the site to provide a more human-friendly and natural appearance. Visitors are offered standard links as calls to action."

Doorway page in wikipedia

"Affiliate Marketing is a popular method of promoting web businesses in which an affiliate is rewarded for every visitor, subscriber and/or customer provided through his efforts. It is a modern variation of the practice of paying finder's-fees for the introduction of new clients to a business. Compensation may be made based on a certain value for each visit (Pay per click), registrant (Pay per lead), or a commission for each customer or sale (Pay per Sale), or any combination."

Affiliate marketing in wikipedia

 

How much are you willing to bet on the outcome of an internall poll at ODP about that issue?

 

You really behave like your signature ("Idiot dmoz editor"). My +1 on those sites being doorway/affiliate sites by "an everage Joe's definition". DMOZ might have its own definition, but DMOZ doesn't seem to relate well to the rest of society.

Step back for a moment and reflect on this unbiastly rather than behaving immaturely. Gworld is far from a knucklehead but rather a very intelligent and reasonable individual.

As much as we may love something, it's possible that it's flawed but we might be too blinded by that love to see it and let our passion get the better of us.

 

He has even a rank of Editall. What a shame.

Post some more sidjf so the community would know what editorial members the Directory has.
And sidjf my username translation is really what you think it is. S--T talk.

And for Annie:
Si, yo hablo mal ingles proque no es mi primer idioma, se hay algun problema a mi no me importa. It just shows that Racism runs in DMOZ.

I'm just wondering if Minstrel can understand me and you can't then......

 

@popotalk, I have read some of your posts, had no problems understanding you and never noticed that English isn't your first language.

So, I agree that the problem is not your linguistic abilities ...

 

Popotalk, now you're calling me racist? Because I wish to understand something you said to me? The fact that you can speak at least 3 languages that I know of impresses me, but it does not make me racist just because I cannot do the same.

Popotalk I have never attacked you, I even sent you a nice comment with green rep after you sent me red yesterday to try to tell you I don't have a problem with you. Yet you keep attacking me for no reason. The problem lies with you. I still haven't attacked you, so could you be kind enough to clearly state what exactly your problem with me is?

Does minstrel always understand you? When did you become his official spokesperson? I missed that memo. And for the record, while minstrel and I do respect each other, we do not share a brain. For all I know, he could be multi-lingual too. If he is, I certainly won't hold it against him and I trust he already knows that.

@ ryan_uk, I have read and understand almost all of popotalk's postings, but some are very unclear. Those posts are in the minority so when I want to understand popotalk's point I ask for clarification. He respond's to requests for clarification with insults, which seems odd if he wants to make a point and I want to understand his point.

So, I also agree that the problem is not his linguistic abilities ... I believe it's more his attitude. There are times when he doesn't want to make a point so he uses linquistics to confuse a point, then cries racism to avoid clarifying what he says. I think that makes him the racist.

 

Sometimes one must discover something without the help of others, without it being explained to them. Like a road of discovery ... when you figure out what it is through your own efforts, then it will mean more to you.

Just like when someone submits to DMOZ and isn't successful ... they must figure it out for themselves, try to solve the problems and then re-submit. So I am sure you can appreciate the lack of clarification from popotalk given you're part of a system that doesn't like to give clarification for its actions.

Good luck on your journey of discovery, compostannie.

 

Personally, I don't wish to edit in Adult but DP posters ask me direct questions about Adult issues. Sometimes in my attempt to understand the question so I can try to answer, I need to request clarification. In these instances, I am not the one seeking discovery. I am being asked to help another who is seeking discovery.

I'm one of those odd editors in the minority who will answer questions. I am not here on a journey of discovery, I am here to help. I do my best, but to expect me to play guessing games and jump through hoops so I can help another person on their journey of discovery is not likely to make another person's questions mean more to me.

Asking that I understand popotalk's lack of clarification based solely on the fact that I'm an dmoz editor is not reasonable, because popotalk is a part of the same system. He too is an editor for dmoz so while I can understand it from others, I can't understand it from popotalk.

 

Here are the terms from the DMOZ glossary - which is the only "dictionary" used when defning guidelines and descriptions:

Doorway Page
A page created to achieve a high ranking in search engines for desirable search queries. This page drives the resulting traffic to the "real" content, which may or may not be located on the same domain.
Related terms: Vanity URL


Vanity URL
A secondary URL (generally much shorter) that either (a) redirects to the real URL (b) acts as an doorway page to the real URL, or (c) uses URL Cloaking to conceal the existence of the real URL. Some domains which host vanity URLs are: come.to, welcome.to, go.to, move.to, and jump.to.
e.g. http://welcome.to/showballet/ is a vanity URL for http://www.showballet.com/index.htm
Related terms: URL Cloaking, Doorway Page

URL Cloaking
A technique using frames in a web browser where one URL "cloaks" or hides the existence of the second URL.
e.g. http://go.to/etna/ is a vanity URL which cloaks the "real" page at http://personal.inet.fi/musiikki/jusaname/etna/index2.html . The former page contains the latter in a frame which spans the entire browser window.
Related terms: Vanity URL

Affiliate Site
A site which is constructed primarily to drive traffic through affiliate links. Affiliate sites (sometimes referred to as simply affiliates) are not listed in ODP unless they have significant non-affiliate content.
See also: Guidelines: Affiliates

Which leads to http://www.dmoz.com/guidelines/include.html#affiliate
Sites consisting primarily of affiliate links, or whose sole purpose is to drive user traffic to another site for the purpose of commission sales, provide no unique content and are not appropriate for inclusion in the directory. However, a site that contains affiliate links in addition to other content (such as a fan site for a singer that has interviews and photos plus banner ads and links to buy the singer's CDs) might be an acceptable submission to the directory.

Gworld keeps quoting the first sentance of this guidelines and leaving of the part that starts "however".

Annie - I think the problem with the editor from the Islands may not be racist as he thinks - after all he doesn't know what race you or I are - but he does know what sex we are.

 

You're not answering the question. You're defending the multiple listing of sites that probably shouldn't have a single listing. And you seem to be ignoring the guidleines of your own directory in the process.

 

Why not? You could then help clean it up of spam.

If you're here to help then that's wonderful.

I hope you can help dmoz too in getting the spam removed and forming consistent policies which apply equally.

I remember when I first heard about dmoz, many years ago now (late 1990s, I think) it sounded like a great idea, but like any closed system there's the potential for abuse.

The same domain listed 35 times comes across as very spam-like, compared to a single listing describing it as "several image galleries featuring attractive ladies" (for example). If a domain is legitimate then it's bound to be perfectly navigable, or searchable, from the root, and therefore all the different ladies galleries will be easily findable.

 

This is unworthy of you, Annie. This is Resourceless Zone garbage.

You continue to miss the point totally. I'm still undecided as to whether this is intentional or merely ignorance.

Unbelievably stupid. I hope you at least have the decency to be embarrassed that you allowed yourself to post it.

 

Because it's icky.
Seriously, although I don't wish to edit in Adult, I have been working on a cleaning up the pedophile section that is being discussed at great length in another thread. Sometimes we have to do some dirty work, but to do that dirty work we must understand the problem.

Seems to make sense to me as well, but since I'm not an adult editor I would first need to learn how it works now, how it should work, how to recognize the affiliates and doorways in this business, and I would need to know the sources of the original material to rule out the copies.

Like I said, this is not my journey but I am willing to help. If others want this fixed and they want me to help get it fixed then I see no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to ask for clarification of things I don't understand. If I get answers, then fine, I'll help. If I get insulted for asking then I'll simply go away to edit someplace I enjoy.

 

Trust me minstrel, this is not unworthy of me and has nothing remotely to do with resourseless zone. There are things about popotalk that you don't know. Things that would make you say much worse of him than I ever will.

Popotalk's only reason for attacking me is that he know's what he's done and he's afraid I'll tell before he can get in solid with DP members. But he was mistaken, I wouldn't have outed him here but I will defend myself when attacked by someone like him.

 

How is this doorway and affiliate definition any different that what this site is doing?
What "however" content is there, except the content of doorway page? You are quaoting the general guideline while DMOZ ADULT GUIDELINE for the IMAGE GALLERIES clearly states:

"Image Galleries

Sections for groups or galleries of pictures, listed by category and type: membership, AVS, or free.

Doorways and affiliate sites are not accepted. "

May be because everybody knows that it will be difficult to find a "however" in an image gallery listing.

This doorway pages have no content, except the pictures that make the doorway page, get listed in DMOZ and helped in serp by DMOZ listing.

 

It's great to know that the pedophile content is in the process of being eliminated from the directory. This (pedophilia) is a big problem in this world and every action made to combat it is important.

If it's a doorway to a pay site (where people need to pay to view material) the first thing a Mr X wants to do is entice someone. Either through text, images, or both. It's little effort and cost (compared to the money that can be made) to put up some pages with photos (original or copied) and text. So Mr or Ms Surfer visits the doorway site after clicking on one of the 35 chances to do so, looks at the pictures (and maybe reads the text) and, as they have enjoyed what they looked at, they visit the link to Mr X's site for more but find that they have to pay. They're so excited by what they saw so they do pay. Mr X has achieved their goal with this doorway.

However, doorway pages can not only provide more ways for someone to end up at Mr X's site but also give more weight to that pay site in a search engine, thus the pay site ranks higher. So-called "blackhat Search Engine Optimisation" tactic. The higher a site is ranking in searches the more visitors they're likely to get.

Commonsense and research into the site and the site(s) it's linking to will give indications as to whether it's just an afiliate or doorway site/page. link: and site: will help a lot when searching google for clues.

 

This is the largest webmaster forum on the net now (that allows people to speak freely), and it is all too clear the approval rating is less than President Bush right now.

 

Ahhh, more typical nonsense from DP. Someone tries to explain something and DPers start attacking them.

Are your lives really so sad and pathetic that you have to get your jollies by trying to abuse people on the internet?

You ask questions and then harrass people for answering them - I just don't see the logic here.

Again, many of you seem to be unable to tell the difference between someone answering a question and someone defending that that should be the answer!

lmocr and annie have both made it quite clear that they don't care for how things are in Adult, and any of you that have access to the ODP forums can read multiple past posts of mine in the Adult forums and see that I have actively tried to change the status quo there.

But, bone of that matters because you would rather just attack people than actually talk to them.

It's simple.

gworld asked about some sites. They are listable. The end.

You don't have to like that answer. In fact, I don't expect you to like it - but that is the answer.

 

Translation of above quote:

Gworld asked a question. It was proved that those listings are against DMOZ own adult guideline and sidjf could not make any run around explanation that remotely made sense even for DMOZ editors but if they try to enforce the guideline, it means the end of "image galleries" and "some people" side benefits of "volunteer" work; therefore, everything must stay the same. Adult editors don't care that people don't like corruption and that is the answer. The end.