1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Remove Listing from DMOZ

Discussion in 'ODP / DMOZ' started by webhamster, Nov 5, 2005.

  1. #1
    Hi guys,

    Can anyone tell me how to get a site removed from DMOZ? There's nothing on their site to do this.

    TIA
    SEMrush
     
    webhamster, Nov 5, 2005 IP
    SEMrush
  2. pagode

    pagode Guest

    Messages:
    257
    Likes Received:
    47
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    For the same reason you can not ask a site to be listed you can not ask a site to be removed.
    But there are some possibilities ;)
    1) remove the site from the Internet
    2) change the site in such a way that it breaks DMOZ guidelines
    after you have done either of these possibilities let DMOZ know through the "update listing" feature (link to be found at the top of the category the site is listed in).
     
    pagode, Nov 5, 2005 IP
    compostannie likes this.
  3. mjewel

    mjewel Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,693
    Likes Received:
    514
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #3

    DMOZ will not remove a site unless they feel it is no longer relevant. They do not honor owner requests to do so. They have a form for submitting changes to the description and/or category, but that is the best option available.
     
    mjewel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  4. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #4
    They have made it clear that they consider a listing to be their "property".

    My other criticisms of DMOZ notwithstanding, this makes sense to me - much like a forum post becomes the "property" of the forum, they have added a listing to their directory and I don't think they should feel compelled or obligated to remove it on request.

    That said, if someone requested a listing removed from my niche directory, I'd do it. As with everything else, I think this is primarily a power and control issue with the DMOZ editors. Would it kill them to delete a listing when the owner requested it?
     
    minstrel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
    fsmedia likes this.
  5. wrmineo

    wrmineo Peon

    Messages:
    3,087
    Likes Received:
    379
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    The reason for your wanting it removed would be paramount in helping you decide the best possible avenue.

    Some good points have been made here though. One, they're not obligated to remove no different than anyone can link to a site, and unless the site in question is damaging the other site's credibility, you've little, if any, recourse. However, I also agree that if the legitimate site owner wants a listing removed, I don't see an issue with that - it should be done.

    But again, you're reasoning for wanting the site removed is paramount in helping you determine a course of action, if any.
     
    wrmineo, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  6. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #6
    DP member I, Brian requested a listing removed at RZ and was adamantly and bluntly refused.

    His reasoning: Google was displaying the DMOZ description which did not accurately describe either his site/services or even his location.

    DMOZ response: Complain to Google. Your listing stands.

    Another example of the DMOZ version of Public Relations and/or goodwill :rolleyes:
     
    minstrel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  7. wrmineo

    wrmineo Peon

    Messages:
    3,087
    Likes Received:
    379
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    The reason I mention the reason for the "delisting" is paramount, is because it can become a praticle exercise of "It's Not What You Ask For, But How You Ask For It" ...

    I had a domain that I let expire and go dead because the client still owed me a ton of money and it was listed in a heavy Business section at DMOZ.

    Even though the domain was "dead" - DMOZ kept it listed. I then went and parked it at a "for sale" place and proceeded to the Resource Zone after it'd propogated.

    After I went to the RZ and explained that the site was no longer in it's "original form" and in compliance with DMOZ editorial guidelines, the thread I started was deleted and so was the listing .... within hours.

    Pagode made a good point along these lines ... if it's "egg in the face" for DMOZ to continue the listing, it's generally removed quickly, especially if you report it under their spam link.

    Again, it's going to depend on why the individual wants the link removed. If you let it expire and your competitor now owns it, they're not going to delist it for you.

    If the category has an editor, it is sometimes more advantageous to send a private, not-public, note and not go through the RZ or spam link.
     
    wrmineo, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  8. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #8
    In the case of Brian, he argued, I think reasonably so, that the listing was hurting his income. Would it have killed DMOZ to just say, "OK, we understand and it's not our intention to cause harm to your business"?
     
    minstrel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  9. wrmineo

    wrmineo Peon

    Messages:
    3,087
    Likes Received:
    379
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    Not trying to be abrasive by any means, but did he first ask for a description change from the editor?

    Even if he didn't, it seems like that should have been the "suggestion" from ODP/RZ going along with your sentiment of "causing no harm" ...
     
    wrmineo, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  10. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #10
    I believe he asked for one or the other and was denied both.

    I just tried to go look for the thread at RZ but the site is still down. Frankly, I suspect that's a huge relief to most DMOZ editors and I'll bet there are more than a few who are hoping it stays that way.

    Hutchenson and Motsa and a few others will be disappointed, of course. They're going to have to find somewhere else where they can go and be imperiously insulting :eek:
     
    minstrel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  11. Alucard

    Alucard Peon

    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    98
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #11
    Well, there are several issues that come up when people ask to have a listing removed:

    First, verifying that the person really IS the site owner - it would be too easy to ask to get a competitor removed...

    Second, they have a publicly-available resource (their website) - they can't control who links to it, nor, in my opinion, should they (there have been court cases over this). I don't think any company has successfully got a link to their site removed on any sort of legal basis.

    Third - you have to ask why they want it removed? And this is the one that in my opinion it usually comes down to. I have heard a few reasons:

    A. I don't want my site to get publicity. I have seen this on personal pages a few times. The trouble is that Google et al might pick up on it and give it all the publicity they don't want. The only solution, in my opinion, to that one is to password protect the site and give that password out to people you want to look at it. The ODP won't list those types of sites, and Google won't either, since it can't spider the contents.

    B. They don't like the keywords that the ODP description uses. Well, in the same way that they can't control the anchor text that anyone else uses to link to their site (nor should they), I don't see they should have any control over the ODP wording. This type of case smacks very much like "If I can't manipulate you the way I want I am picking up my toys and going home". (Yes, I know that is cynical of me)

    Can anyone think of any other reason? I would be really curious to hear why a site wouldn't want free publicity?

    Oh the other hand, I do know of some special cases where sites have been removed for good reason. Some for legal reasons, some not involving legal action at all.

    Minstrel: The location got changed immediately (in fact, it wasn't him that complained about the location, only the wording, it was me that found out he had moved without letting us know :) ) - his issue was the wording.

    And FTR, the description DID describe the business. Just not using the terms he wanted. And that was the reason for his requesting the delisting. I can't remember his category exactly, but one of the editorial guideliens (and I don't remember if it's official or not) is not to duplicate stuff which could be derived from the category name in the description. So if you are listed in a Manhattan Web Designers category, for example, don't expect any of the words "New York City", "Manhattan" or "Web Design" to occur in the description, as its redundant.

    One of the beefs that the ODP has had with people that use the data, and Google is included, is that they don't use the category name as part of the search terms for sites that we list. I think it would enhance their functionality and tee off a lot less people if they did.
     
    Alucard, Nov 5, 2005 IP
    wrmineo and compostannie like this.
  12. wrmineo

    wrmineo Peon

    Messages:
    3,087
    Likes Received:
    379
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #12
    Friends, DPers, Posters, lend me your ears .... for I have not come to praise OPD, nor to bash it :D

    Well put Alucard - I'm amazed at how well you handle yourself in these manic-depressive, love-hate threads.

    I tried to get OPD to change the description of my personal pages site to Geek god but to no avail, it merely remains at Geek.

    You have some valid points here and to that I tip my hat (for a tip please ... jk), but I also think you've affirmed my point somewhat - It's not what you ask for, but how you ask for it. Of course "WHY" is also important.
     
    wrmineo, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  13. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #13
    I'll take your word for it, Alucard - I can't access the RZ right now in any case.

    But my point isn't necessarily to make a case for I, Brian or anyone else specifically. The point is that he believed the DMOZ listing was hurting his business and I thought he presented some convincing reasons why he thought that to be true. Consequently, he asked for EITHER a description change OR removal of the listing. He wasn't asking DMOZ to change it's rules in any blanket sense - just asking for a change in something he felt was hurting his bank account.

    That doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable request. DMOZ has, I'm sure, lots of other sites listed in web design/SEO categories - would it kill them to remove one listing?

    I don't have a DMOZ-sized website, of course, but if I received a request like Brian's I wouldn't think twice about it - I'd edit or remove the listing, depending on which I thought would be most fair to both of us.

    I have a couple of forums and on one in particular I get requests from time to time to remove a thread, usuallu based on fears about anonymity. Now, I could take the position that I own the thread and I'll do whatever I want. But the human thing to do is to consider the request on it's merits and do what's fair and right as opposed to whatever the forum regulations (or DMOZ regulations) state.

    It's no skin off DMOZ's nose to remove the listing. Why not just accede to the request?
     
    minstrel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  14. riz

    riz Peon

    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    17
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    This issue is innately relevant to the underlying philosophy of ODP. The directory is being built to provide accurate and unbiased information. The issue of monetary consequence is completely irrelevant. Why it is that Google is using this data? Please, do not call them incompetent, or lazy. The SEO industry legitimizes it self by manipulating their search results. If Google were to look for an unbiased outside source to compare their results with, can you honestly, without any prejudice, find a better source than DMOZ?
     
    riz, Nov 5, 2005 IP
    compostannie likes this.
  15. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #15
    That is unbelievably arrogant. It obviously isn't irrelevant to Brian. Note that he wasn't trying to spam DMOZ or to have his description altered to something that was a lie - he was pointing out that his DMOZ listing was putting him at a disadvantage with respect to his competitors because it implied a more limited range of services than he actually offered. He was even demanding that DMOZ change the description - rather, he simply (and politely) asked that either the description be changed or the listing be dropped.

    I wish I could quote the thread here but with RZ down I can't.
     
    minstrel, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  16. brizzie

    brizzie Peon

    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    178
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #16
    RZ is back.

    Google is playing around with the snippets it uses trying to find more relevance by seeing how other sites describe it. Presumably because its robots can't find anything on the site itself that is credible to them. Removing the DMOZ listing doesn't solve that one for the webmaster. They might find themselves gone from Google altogether. Google may be wondering whether the site is in fact real and the DMOZ listing is giving it credibility. They may continue to get the same snippet based on data previously taken up by hundreds of directories. Work out why Google doesn't see anything on the site as being relevant and is choosing the DMOZ description - removing the listing entirely is dangerous unless you know precisely what the consequences may be. Webmaster perspective.

    If Google continues to play with snippets and webmasters perceive rightly or wrongly that the DMOZ entry is a negative factor then allowing one entry to be removed upon request becomes removing two, twenty, twenty thousand. Editors' priority is to list sites, not to delist perfectly listable ones. Not withstanding the work that would be entailed in verifying the request was legitimate - who is authorised in a company to make such a request and how can it be checked. Write to the registered owner of the URL maybe? Resources are limited and this would be a very poor precedent. DMOZ perspective.

    Editors have played out the arguments on removal of sites by request before primarily relating to personal sites - the arguments that won the day were if you don't want people to see the site then password protect it. It was a lengthy, lively, and comprehensive debate so please don't anyone think it is an arbitrary decision not to delist sites on demand. I don't think editors are particularly bothered about losing one listing in millions. But what sways me is the need not to create a precedent. And there are alternatives the webmaster can use - make the site unlistable. Or find out from Google why they are using DMOZ descriptions and not the one from the site - and fix the underlying reason not a symptom.
     
    brizzie, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  17. macdesign

    macdesign Peon

    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    59
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #17
    I have a single post here I wanted removed or edited, since it has some things I'd just as soon someone else not see, it could hurt my rankings. I was told that this was not an option available to me.

    I don't think you can get any search engine to remove your listing, why should DMOZ offer that service?
     
    macdesign, Nov 5, 2005 IP
    compostannie likes this.
  18. Alucard

    Alucard Peon

    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    98
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #18
    The original description was correct according to the ODP's guidelines - I looked at it at the time of the RZ posting. OK, so it didn't list the various services he had to offer - that's not the job of the ODP, otherwise each description would be a long, barely-maintainable list of keywords - the ODP just isn't going to do that.

    It wasn't WRONG - it wasn't to the site-owner's taste from a search perspective, that's all. He asked to have it changed (as an update request), and the reviewing editor declined to change, then he asked to have it removed.
     
    Alucard, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  19. shygirl

    shygirl Guest

    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    65
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    With all due respect...

    This first and foremost is a 'directory' you're talking about. It works like one too.

    I've just had a look at the other directory area here. Boy, they're popping up everywhere aren't they ?

    People even pay others in order to submit to 100's of them at a time for the listings.
    I personally have had an eye opening few weeks, but at no point in the proceedings have I seen on ANY of the directories here springing up every day or so, in any way shape or form...

    ANY section in the TOS of any briefly browsed directories here where it states, "if you at any point do not wish to continue having your site displayed in our directory, you than have the right as a website owner to ask us to de-list you".

    Plenty of bumf about how much time it may take to get round to you, what they won't list (ie adult or sites less than pr4 , blah bah, just depends on the directory in question and what it is looking for doesn't it ? ). Or even how much to pay in order to get yourself listed quicksmart. I guess if you have money to burn then that's fine. But plenty don't.

    However, if you can point out to me ONE directory out there you know of that has this phrase within it's TOS "Ask for a De-list HERE !" or something similar ?

    Then what can I say, oops, yes I may just agree that it's just so common-place in the 'directory world' that webmasters just clamour to get their sites out. Happens all the time doesn't it ???

    If you can then I'll agree that perhaps DMOZ should indeed fall in line with all the "many" others there that do so.

    If not ? Then please treat DMOZ as you would any other directory. Because that's exactly what it is. A directory that follows the same, no in fact, a directory that lots of others follow their lead from, and in many cases in fact, duplicate it.

    Show me the 'webmaster right to de-list' section on the 100's of 'list your site in this new directory' posts here. And I may conceed the point. But until then don't expect any other directories, and more specifically DMOZ to do so.

    No-one else does it ? What makes Dmoz any different ?? :confused:
     
    shygirl, Nov 5, 2005 IP
  20. Blogmaster

    Blogmaster Blood Type Dating Affiliate Manager

    Messages:
    25,924
    Likes Received:
    1,354
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    380
    #20
    Blogmaster, Nov 5, 2005 IP