Remove Listing from DMOZ

Don't forget, rape, torture, child porn,... without a proper procedures everything will be added at the same time, not only the good ones.

that would have been true if this was my only proposal but it is not. All these are small steps that combined will make it very difficult for abusive listings and opens the door to accepting more volunteers.

And you never asked yourself, why?

 

Right, listing that type of site just feels good.

No, the current guidelines allow me to list the schools, hospitals and sites that benefit society without requiring me to even look at the kind of trash you're mentioning, even if they've been waiting longer. I think that's a good thing.

 

Now that is a good idea! But I thought they were going to do a big review of listed sites shortly, which should occupy them for a while.

 

Gworld do you honestly, honestly believe that 99% of editors are only out for themselves for 'self-gain' and 'self-interest' ?

You don't seem like you don't want to give any of them/us the benefit of the doubt at all. Are you really so blinded by your 'mission' that you can't see that yes sometimes mistakes are made, and rogue editors do gain access on occasion ( You being an example I guess ?)... and that there are 'issues' to be dealt with.

We'll all accept that, mistakes, oversights and editors who shouldn't be there sometimes get 'in'. But why would you want to tar us all with the same self-interested, easily bribeable, 'who gives a shit' I'll list it anyway type persona.

Do you really think thats what we ALL do ? Or would you be willing to concede that most of us aren't like that ?

 

I concede that most of you really don't matter.

There is no organizational structure for implementation of changes by editors. DMOZ in reality is controlled by very small group that operates independent of editors wishes.

What is the point of all your good intentions when in reality what you think doesn't matter at all?

 

So, devising a system to address such sites means impacting on the 99.999% of listings that have nothing whatever to do with them.

Well if the rest is anything like so far we have a real treat coming.

Small state, small population, not very interesting (sorry but it's not, I took pity).

 

No, I was just giving the other side of your argument. You sound like one of the dictators in those small countries, don't think about all the innocent people that we torture or put in prison, just think about all the good things that we do by torturing and imprisoning the criminals.

 

Whilst Admin priorities and mine don't coincide, they did conduct a lengthy exercise to work out what editors wanted and put work into addressing them. IMO, it resulted in looking at frilly dressings to the detriment of real pressing issues, but they did consult and they did respond. And there are processes for initiating and implementing change originating from any editor - all they need to do is start a thread and if they have a good point then eventually and with persistence it will result in change.

What shygirl thinks does matter. It matters a great deal more than your paranoid conspiracy theories.

 

'How to Win Friends and Influence People'... I'm impressed !

 

I am sorry that telling the truth hurts your feelings but that is the reality in DMOZ.

 

Gworld, you know nothing of reality.

 

But you want to throw out the good with the bad. I just want to get rid of the bad and leave the good. You want to tar all editors with the same brush as a tiny tiny percentage of editors that are bad, deal with all editors as if they were bad. That is not the way to increase editor numbers. You want to introduce totalitarian and draconian changes to editing processes because of 0.001% of listings that might be pedophile supporting, child porn, and related to other vile practices. I would rather see things strengthened that specifically target these sorts of site. Your approach is far nearer that of a totalitarian dictator of a banana republic than mine.

 

Don't flatter yourself luvvie lol, I enjoy a good debate. I've learned to take these posts and hurt feelings lying down here and laugh them off ! And since Minstrel in other thread has just told me to go and play solo ? I don't think I'm doing so good myself winning friends either ?

I've said before, I say what I see regardless and to the best of my ability. Your issues seem generally confined to senior editors ( as you so politely pointed out). I was just wondering why you insist on lumping editors all in together in some sort of 'dumb blonde like' stereotype ? Only out for the money and the kudos.

 

Oh, but it appears that he does!

People who are obsessed with their own self-interest have difficulty imagining that anyone else could possibly be altruistic.

 

You are right when you are right, I really don't have any problem with editors since well, they can not actually do anything, my problem is with "senior" editors.

 

And for the life me, I can not figure out, why such a nice person as you that is only concerned with what is best for everyone in the world, almost always ends up supporting the worst in DMOZ.

 

I'm was gonna be picky there (can't be seen to agree with an Admin in public) and argue altruism against psychological egoism but the post got a bit complicated and I was only doing it to be pedantic. So I'll stick with I know what I think you mean.

 

Hello Minstrel,

I didn't want to post the URL out of respect for your forum. I also apologise to all of you for not jumping back into this discussion much sooner.

The URL is www.beautybyus.com

The listing in Google's SERPs can be viewed at site:www.beautybyus.com

DMOZ have titled the listing as "Beauty By Us" instead of using our own title tag "Online Appointment Book for Salons and Spas".

This has been done in accordance with their listing guidelines: i.e. listings for commercial sites get titled accoding to the corporate name.

However, since the DMOZ title and snippet are overriding our own title and snippet in the Google SERPS, the DMOZ listing is having an absolute negative effect on our final rank in those SERPs.

No way out,
[organix]

 

Try this organix - it's devised by MSN Search but it may well catch on with other search engines including Google if enough people implement it:

From Opting Out of Open Directory Listings for Webmasters:

I've added BOTH tags to all the pages on my main site.

 

Very cool minstrel, thank you.

Hopefully the other search engines adopt this method and it is confirmed as a standard.

[organix]