I have an established site that had 7 dmoz listings for many years, a few months ago I was delisted (competitor?) and I have not had any drop in traffic - at all - none. There has been no traffic drop because dmoz delivers no traffic. There has been no drop in search engine traffic because I have lots of other backlinks - 7 links is a drop in the bucket and not enough to affect my site. If you only have a few links then being listed or not listed on any quality page will affect your traffic and ranking - not just dmoz. I would still submit a site there because it is a free quality link but I'm fully convinced that dmoz is not any more valuable than any other link.
If you provide the URL then an editor here can investigate to see if the delistings were justified and, if unjustified, restore some or all. Or give you an explanation as to why they were delisted. It may be as simple as the site being temporarily unavailable when an editor checked. Usually only 2 listings would be the maximum though 7 can be entirely legitimate depending on the site and subject matter. That doesn't surprise me in the least, sounds like you are doing your web marketing sensibly and, unlike some others, know that a DMOZ listing isn't a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. I feel really sorry for all those people who spend hours trying to spam and scam to get into DMOZ thinking it will solve all their problems. Some even spend hundreds of hours becoming an editor and building up their credits to get editing rights to list their site in a good PR category. And then find that their bank balance has diminished rather than increased because they should have spent that time on doing their marketing right.
Thank you I asked at the resource zone and they said any editor who gave me that info might lose their editing privileges...that sort of left me with bad feelings. Plus I remember being banned from the inktomi database years ago and that worked out okay. Maybe life without dmoz will work out okay too.
Really? That sounds absolutely incredible. There is no reason why editors can't look to see if a delisting is justified and no reason why they can't tell you why. Neither is against any DMOZ guideline. What they can't do is quote from the note the editor left on the rejection but they can paraphrase or explain in their own words. They can also choose not to tell you anything. Please do share the URL - I'm intrigued as to what might be so bad about the site editors are threatened with being removed for telling you. I'm not longer an editor but I did serve several years as a senior editor before retiring so I could have a good educated guess for you. I looked at Resource Zone (first time in months but nothing has changed) and the only thread I could find referring to a site removal was commented that RZ has a policy of not answering this type of query. http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44952 That is only an RZ policy and RZ is not an official organ of DMOZ, i.e. they set their own rules and cannot impose those rules on other forums such as this nor do they have any power over what information editors can give here. If you want real information as opposed to a rant from hutcheson in response to what most people might view as a reasonable question then RZ is not the place to go.
The Resourceless Zone is not an official voice of anything except arrogance, paranoia, and bullying. It is a complete waste of time to ask anything there. Unless you are an editor, all you'll get is misinformation and insults. And sometimes, even if you're an editor, that will happen (find the thread where they attacked Summer Hogan, for example).
hehe I noticed that too but to be fair there are some editors who are kind and intelligent. I didn't post my url in that forum, I just asked how to find out what happened and the editor that offered to help me was told not to. So it wasn't anything to do specifically with my site. It's just what is (or what one of them thinks is) their policy.
As I said, that is because it is against RZ policies. I'm not exactly sure why RZ is actually there given it scares people off becoming editors more than it encourages new people to join. Suffice it to say that its popularity internally is not much higher than its popularity externally. You can ask the same question in other forums and editors who want to be helpful are totally free to do so. That is why many of them come to places like this - to give help they are forbidden to give in RZ. No-one can tell you anything without the URL. RZ won't even let you post the URL. Let's say that for the sake of argument you have been victim of misdeeds - it is important for DMOZ to find that out. Let's say the removals were legitimate - it is important for DMOZ to consider whether its guidelines are clear enough so you understand why and don't go around suggesting it might be a competitor of yours. In fact it is in DMOZ's interests all round to help you - RZ policies generally work against DMOZ interests. So please do post the URL and let an editor here prove that the majority of editors are helpful to polite enquirers. If the delistings were an error then no doubt they will be restored. If they were correct then it helps you and others to understand why. No-one can lose.
I see that pvgool AKA pagode and the other names in this forum is still not happy to be found out for multiple accounts register and getting banned.
Who exactly DOES own and admin The Resourceless Zone? I mean specifically? Addendum: Okay - I see the names of a few familiar and annoying names in just browsing there: jimnoble R-Z Administrator hutcheson Moderator motsa R-Z Administrator bobrat (aka macdesign) Member Nigritude Ultramarine Toronto (apparently he doesn't realize that SEO contest has been over for about 2 years)
I don't condone breaking the rules of any site you use and that includes DMOZ, Digital Point, and Resource Zone but maybe that's just me... Gworld, it seems weird to me that you'd point fingers at pvgool for having multiple accounts at Digital Point but you see no problem with having multiple accounts yourself at DMOZ. Pvgool is an excellent editor, and very productive. I have a great deal of respect for him.
The difference is that I am honest about it and my multiple accounts is part of fighting DMOZ corruption and a response to censor and undemocratic procedures in DMOZ . On the other hand, pvgool was not censored here and his actions was the result of his desire to deceive the forum members. He was doing this while pretending to be holier than thou.
Ahh... brilliant! So it's ok to be dishonest as long as you're honest about it? Gworld, no one makes me smile quite like you do.
How? Exactly? And I don't recall internal threads being censored at all. Pvgool is entitled to his opinion but asking questions at RZ is generally futile. At least people get answers here even if they do have to sort the information from the misinformation. There are alternatives to both - take your pick. http://whois.domaintools.com/resource-zone.com http://dmoz.org/profiles/vbman.html (meta editor), though to my knowledge he is an infrequent contributor.
What is your solution? 1) Be honest, get removed and have no way to influence and change abusive practices. 2) Quit and let Admins and Metas continue with abuse and corruption 3) Keep my head down and my mouth shut, so I can continue while the "senior" editors continue with their corrupt practices What do you recommend?
I have to agree with gworld here. Working for change from within is futile. I'm not sure I have any hope left for working for change from without either but there is absolutely zero chance of voluntary change from within.
We can disagree with each respectfully, which is why Gworld makes me smile. I'm just saying that pvgool is a good guy too. Yes he broke a rule here, but so have others. Even gworld was banned from DP at one time, so why the need to single out pvgool and point rudely at him?