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. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #101
    If I recall correctly, one of the DMOZ editors earlier in this thread suggested that DMOZ has to abide by the laws of California. I guess that's either where the servers are or the headquarters of AOL or DMOZ...

    If that's correct, then the laws of Norway are irrelevant.
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  2. brizzie

    brizzie Peon

    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    178
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #102
    Pornzite has 107 listings currently and I did check the identity of the listing editor responsible for 2 at random. You can tell by the absence of a feedback link on their profile that the individual concerned is no longer an editor and has not been for over a year. As to whether the listings are within the guidelines I do not know sufficient about the Adult guidelines to judge - there are many things about those guidelines I neither understand nor want to get involved in. As to whether they are legal I am not a lawyer and this appears technical. Probably best it was referred to AOL's legal department.
     
    brizzie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  3. compostannie

    compostannie Peon

    Messages:
    1,693
    Likes Received:
    347
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #103
    The thing is, I personally dislike the Adult section. A lot! I feel my time as a volunteer is just as valuable working in less offensive parts of the directory, plus if I enjoy it I'll do more work. IF I'm going to do any work in Adult, it's going to involve rooting out an abusive editor because the only thing in the ODP that's more offensive to me than the Adult directory would be an abusive editor.

    It's a matter of priorities. Tell me there's an abusive editor in Adult and I'll be there poking around. Otherwise, I have better things to do. ;)
     
    compostannie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  4. brizzie

    brizzie Peon

    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    178
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #104
    Sorry, I may be misleading on the legal side. The licence for data use is covered by California law. The guidelines are not specific on whether it is illegal to link to sites outside the US that would be illegal inside.

    "Editors should therefore comply with the laws of their own jurisdictions regarding the activity of listing various types of websites. If the act of listing a specific type of site in your jurisdiction could be considered illegal, then you should not list it, and leave it for someone else to review."

    An American site that did not comply with US law would, I presume, be illegal. A non-American site hosted outside the US would not be illegal unless it transgressed the law where it is hosted. Whether holding a link to a legal site outside the US is illegal on a US-based server is beyond me.

    Sorry for any confusion
     
    brizzie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  5. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #105
    DMOZ TOS:

    "Illegal Sites
    Sites with unlawful content should not be listed in the directory, particularly those intent and substantially focused on making available and distributing illegal materials. Examples of content that is illegal in most jurisdictions include child pornography; material that infringes on intellectual property rights; material that advocates, solicits or abets illegal activity (such as fraud or violence) in specific instances; and material that is libelous. Factual and how-to information is generally NOT abetting illegal conduct unless its intent is to facilitate the immediate commission of a crime in a specific situation. "

    The lack of 2257 declaration makes it a child porn site according to US law. :rolleyes:

    It seems now that it is proved that DMOZ lists illegal sites, you lost interest in illegal sites and only interested in editors abuse, so here it is from my previous postings:


    "... Let's talk about facts. One of the editors for DMOZ uses the name: *****mistress

    1- Search for this name on google, it shows the same user name is advertising sites on different web sites with with telephone number 1-900-321-****

    2- Search Google for the same telephone number. you will get a list of different url. mostly one page ad web sites.
    Some of the Domains are:

    Asian-sweet******.com
    Black-phone-***.com
    Sweetblack****.com
    ..............
    ..............

    3- Search DMOZ.org for the same domains. You will see these domains are listed 4,7 and 3 times. Is really a one page ad web site, so important that has to be listed 7 times? Or has the editor spammed DMOZ to get listed 7 times?

    4- The total links for these 3 sites is 14 on DMOZ, now multiply this number by 4000 that you mentioned as the number of sites that use DMOZ as their directory and you will get 56000 links for only the three mentioned web sites.

    Not bad for so called little "VOLUNTEER" work"


    Because it is so difficult for you to guess or do your own research, Here is the link to editor page in DMOZ:;)

    http://dmoz.org/profiles/phonemistress.html
     
    gworld, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  6. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #106
    That is of course your choice, Annie - I don't blame you a bit - it would be like poking around in a sewer in there.

    On the other hand, Gworld pointed out a site that he believed was illegal. You can choose whether or not you want to investigate but I don't think it's fair to dismiss his claims out of hand if you choose not to simply because it isn't necessarily editor abuse related.
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  7. lmocr

    lmocr Peon

    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    85
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #107
    TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 > § 2257

    ODP does not produce anything that contains the items described. That's like saying Internet Explorer or Firefox or Google or Yahoo or whoever makes the content available has the same responsibilty that the producer of the content has.

    Here's another link that defines a producer http://my.execpc.com/~xxxlaw/2257Tables5.24.05.htm
     
    lmocr, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  8. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #108
    Interesting combination of DMOZ categories for that editor:

    :eek:
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  9. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #109
    :confused: Are you an editor too? Whether yes or no, are you now trying to say that DMOZ policy does NOT prohibit listing sites with illegal content simply because DMOZ itself does not produce that content?
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  10. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #110
    Most likely he is an editor, who else would defend DMOZ corruption, except an editor? :rolleyes:

    I just did a Google search for "DMOZ corruption phonemistress" and you can look at the page that I found. Everything very well documented, so Annie doesn't need to guess or do too much research. Any of the editors here are going to look in to this or everybody is going to leave and become quite as usual? ;)

    Phone Sex and the so called "Open Directory" at DMOZ
     
    gworld, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  11. lmocr

    lmocr Peon

    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    85
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #111
    Yes I'm an editor - I've said that a few times before - and I'm a she :) .

    No - I'm not advocating listing illegal sites. What I'm saying is that IMO the site specified does not appear to be illegal - based on what I've read in the last few hours - nor does the fact that it appears as a link in the ODP (if it does appear in ODP, because I haven't looked at that). There are sites that are illegal in one jurisdiction, that are not in others. The position taken by the ODP has already been stated over and over again - so I won't bore you with it again.

    I don't edit in areas where there are controversies - at least not that I know of :) . But I don't mind having an honest discussion about them - and giving my opinion.
     
    lmocr, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  12. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #112
    Well, male or female, it doesn't matter. But since there seems to be some uncertainty even among editors as to what defines an illegal site in DMOZ, it might bear further inquiry.

    And what about the allegations in the page Gworld found? They are pretty specific, it seems to me - it shouldn't be too difficult for an editor to verify that information.
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  13. compostannie

    compostannie Peon

    Messages:
    1,693
    Likes Received:
    347
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #113
    gworld, I will not do any research in the Adult directory; I did not list any of those sites and I don't like the category. Now that you've named an editor, please take the initiative to do the research you insist I do, and then forward your specific evidence to me. I need a list of full urls, (no scavenger hunts or guess work) and I need the evidence showing who the sites belong to, and how the other sites are inter-related, as you've alleged.

    I have plenty of work in other areas of the directory. I do not like porn. If you want me to jump into the cesspool of the Adult directory, it will be on my terms or not at all. If you have specific details, forward them; make a list of URLs with the owner and the category. Spare me the nastiness of digging through these sites myself; give me the evidence, I will confirm the facts, and then deal with it. (You said you already know this; why would you try to force me to duplicate your research?)

    If you aren't willing to do that much, you really don't have any right to fault me for not doing it for you. It's absurd for you to insist I make the Adult directory a personal priority over all the other categories in the main ODP directory. Sorry if that bothers you, but your obsession with the Adult directory will not dictate my priorities.

    So... are you going to continue complaining and demanding that I do the research, are you going to share your information, or are you going to drop it? :confused:

    I'll even say "pretty please" if you like. ;)
     
    compostannie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  14. compostannie

    compostannie Peon

    Messages:
    1,693
    Likes Received:
    347
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #114
    Gee minstrel, that site hasn't been updated since 2003 and I know for a fact that at least some of the editors named in that article are no longer with ODP. Didn't check on all of them, and I didn't click on the porn links.

    Would some kind gentleman be willing to check the information on that site for accuracy, see if the links still work and if so are they all still listed in ODP, and if they are listed, in what category?

    Come on guys, help me out here. :(
     
    compostannie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  15. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #115
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  16. compostannie

    compostannie Peon

    Messages:
    1,693
    Likes Received:
    347
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #116
    No, gworld has not given the details I'm requesting, I want him to click on the links and tell me what's wrong with them and who owns them so I don't have to look at that crud.

    Of the editors listed at that link, 5 are ex-editors; only one is currently an editor. Are the allegations factual? um, I honestly don't know... possibly to some extent at sometime in the past, possibly not... I don't have access to the details of what happened to the ex-editors. I can guarantee that ex-editors cannot abuse the directory once they become ex-editors, so it's not factual now, in November 2005.

    What I can tell you for certain is that page is terribly outdated. Only 1 out of 6 named editors are even with the ODP.

    So, are we to believe this one editor is a "DMOZ Gang" complete with a "Godfather" engaging in "criminal conspiracy," a "very serious crime in the USA and not unlike other organized criminal operations that have been prosecuted here."

    Sorry, but that sounds ludacris to me. It's hard to take that site seriously so no, I won't click on the links. Maybe one of you gentlemen would be so kind as to click on the website links to verify the sites are still there, and also click on the category links to verify that they are listed. Please report your findings, I'd be interested to know what you learn.

    Thanks in advance for your help! :)
     
    compostannie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  17. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #117
    Perhaps you can get one of your fellow editors or metas to do that... I'll play devil's advocate here and suggest that sounds like you want gworld to do your work for you. He's pointed you to a potential problem. If you'd rather not investigate, fine. But I don't think it's reasonable to demand that he do it for you.
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  18. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #118
    Which one? Is it webmistress?
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  19. compostannie

    compostannie Peon

    Messages:
    1,693
    Likes Received:
    347
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #119
    Now minstrel, you know I won't tell you that but I'll bet you could find out for yourself if you poke around the Adult categories to see who's listed and who isn't. :p
     
    compostannie, Nov 13, 2005 IP
  20. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #120
    Well, gworld gave us this link to a DMOZ editor profile: http://dmoz.org/profiles/phonemistress.html which says "copyright 1998-2005" and on that page she lists her home page as http://www.phonemistress.com/ which says "copyright 1992-2006" (sic), so in the absence of any disclaimer I'm guessing she's still active.

    She was mentioned prominently as owning 49 of 149 sites listed in one category she edited.

    That seems more than a little questionable to me...

    Maybe there is a reasonable explanation for it...
     
    minstrel, Nov 13, 2005 IP