I ran into a couple of thread over at digitalpoint (this one) where the thread author claimed that ODP would delist sites that posted their links in the Marketplace (or for sale) section.

I was a little skeptical, but then I found another thread (this one) where a site had actually been dumped from ODP -- presumably because they posted their ODP listed site for sale.

Am I the only one that thinks this is hilariously typical of ODP? -- Oh and pathetic, don't forget pathetic.

What possible basis or grounds could exist for removing a site from the directory simply because it's been posted for sale?

You know, Feedburner just got bought by some other company... yet I see their site is still listed in ODP. So... is it more a matter of where or how you sell your site that makes the difference between being kicked or kept in ODP?

__________________
WebProNews Videos

ODP represents the height of hypocrisy.

First of all it's not open. I have been trying for years for someone over there to list one of my sites and all I get back from them is a long hollow echo. It's interface hasn't changed in years. Having no update in years means that as a directory, it is woefully out of date and provides no real directory service at all.

Add to that the stories about volunteer editors requesting payment to list and the fact that at some point it featured very highly in getting google listed this adds corruption to the "open" directory.

I get the solid impression that there is one kid in a Harry Potter outfit zapping things with his wand ....blessing whom He will bless and cursing those he will curse and giggling in a girlish glee. To expect resonableness, professionlism or even maturity from this kid seems a little beyond the reach of rationality

I'd like to know how much "cred" DMOZ still has with google.

__________________
There is a time for every purpose under heaven.
http://www.expresspools.com http://www.sjvwd.com

A GREAT BIG DITTO

I even applied as an editor and was denied for some trivial reason. You'd think if they really need good editors, then they wouldn't be so picky.

__________________
Advertising without research is like shooting an arrow into the air and
then looking up for a target to catch it with.

The same grounds they have for keeping perfectly good websites out. I dont even bother with them anymore.

__________________
KBK Marketing | Search Marketing Blog | Cheap Web Hosting

yeap, dmoz does remove sites that are for sale. it is lame.

If your selling a site listed on DMOZ, don't tell your possible buyers about it public. Privately yes...

__________________
Blog Posts For Sale / Financial Blog
"Ownership has its privileges, you know." - pyramid termite

*G* and DMOZ are bigbrothers.

__________________
Blog Posts For Sale / Financial Blog
"Ownership has its privileges, you know." - pyramid termite

Had you taken the time to look at the competitiors sites and their meta descriptions and site design I think you might be able to see why other sites were included and yours was not.

For example your description tag reads as so

<meta NAME="Description" CONTENT="Web Design For Fresno, the San Joaquin Valley and Beyond">

This is at best lazy and non descriptive you failed to include the state and simply input words

Here is an example from ODP

A Boulder, Colorado based company that provides designing, and hosting services for businesses and individuals.

While many claim editors at ODP sold positions.... few if any... have offered valid proof.

Might want to look at your site from a different set of eyes.

Peace!

__________________
Create Your List!!!
Make Money With Twitter!!!

Yeah - it is somewhat 'strange' that Google puts so much weight on DMOZ entries yet there seems to be no consistency/quality in the handling of that directory.

__________________
Online Yellow Pages | Time Released Messaging | Phone Number Verification System

I said One of my sites......I did not say the site on my signature But thanks for your input. We both could use new eyes

__________________
There is a time for every purpose under heaven.
http://www.expresspools.com http://www.sjvwd.com

New eyes and I would like to rotate mine out weekly lol...seriously though I rank websites at # 1 for high comp keyword terms and no DMOZ listing

A Yahoo directory link does appear to be worth $299.00 however if anyone is interested.

__________________
Create Your List!!!
Make Money With Twitter!!!

DMOZ is a joke. Its lost all creditibilty. Why nobody has tackled Google over its relevance to search results is boyond my comprehension.
But then again, Google are hypocritical too.
I posted an article a year ago that DMOZ was hacked, something they deny. Remember how it went skewy with no communication for 4 months? And Google still rely on it as an "Authority" site.

SEMadvance: I'm 5 years and waiting to be listed in DMOZ. The catagory that I need to be listed in hasn't had an add or a subtract in years at my last check. I was also invited to be an editor by another editor; but when I applied, I was rebuked by the editorial board. Yes, DMOZ seems to be irrelevent, however, it is still relevent as far as far reaching links by other directories and to big G are concerned. I still feel that having a link in DMOZ is probably a better piece of SEO than most changes on a website, and especially better than the now defunct "Links at all costs campaigns" we all ran a few years back.

As far as Yahoo...I still think $299 is a bit steep to be listed in their directory, especially when a site spends (spent) lots on Overture.

__________________
kjohnson
www.discount-leather.net
Pat yourself on the back before they kick you in the a__

You clearly misunderstand the meaning of "Open" in the title ODP. The use of the term 'open' has been discussed ad nauseum in forums - I guess it does not suit your rant to acknowledge why the ODP used the term. duh? When you say "trying", what have you been doing? If you have submitted more than once, then that might be why you are not listed! How do you think any directory (DMOZ or other) should treat those who deliberatly flout the guidelines?Please provide ONE piece of evidence about editors accepting or asking for payments. Have you not noticed that in all those stories and forum threads, not one of them is backed up with any evidence? or does it not suit the purposes of your rant to notice that?

As per usual, I guess the facts get in the way of a good rant. Maybe you should get your facts right first. What happened to DMOZ during that time has been well documented and explained.

What weight? I thought the consensus was that Google was not giving any extra weight or very slight weight to a DMOZ listing.

Google aren't stupid. They do a lot of testing. If they give extra juice to any particular link from any particular source, I would assume they have tested it and on the balance of things, a 'global' better search results are served up to the searcher.

Have you ever consider that if Google does give extra weight to a DMOZ listing (and I not convinced that they do), that the very reason that they might do it, is the very reason why so many webmasters complain about it? Think about it.

Back to the original post:

Google has delisted sites for selling things based on PR (remember Search King?).
If people are selling a site and using its DMOZ listing as something to get a better price for the sale, why should they not delist it? (Besides, who is stupid enough to pay more for a site that has a DMOZ listing!)

I also doubt it gets delisted. Most likely what is happening is the site is removed from public view for a further review at a later date to see if any hijack has taken place. If not, it will probably be back on public view at some stage.

Some may see that as lame, I see it as a good quality control means to prevent the selling of domains based on the potential to hijack a domain listing just to get a DMOZ listing (and threads complain about that happening!). Given how many hijacks happen of sites that are listed in DMOZ (and the complaints about that), I would have thought such a pro-active stance by DMOZ would have been applauded!

The paradoxical thing is we have this thread complaining about it. Its just as likely to see a thread bashing DMOZ if a domain was sold and it kept a listing that was hijacked!

No, Google, like many others, used the free database to initially fill up their own search databases, and have continued to use it when their spyders can't get to the site, or chose not to. They arn't related at all.

__________________
http://MADEinUSA.org and others.

Where does it say that "DMOZ is an authority site" ???
They us it for fill, just like many other engines...

"No communications for a month" ???
You mean you got something back from them?
Pray tell how you did that.

DMOZ has a stench about it, but no one with any pull seems to be listening.

__________________
http://MADEinUSA.org and others.

How do you know they are not listening? Maybe they just disagree with you.

Uh, because they listed it. Is DMOZ open for listing sites or not?

UH, stupid? Who said paying more?

Yeah, uh huh, sure, we believe you. (Where are YOUR facts?)

No, it is not appreciated. They have so much 'pro-activity' going on by a select club, that it is usless as much as it's service is needed. We are saddled with wanting to clean it up because it hurts us. All the people willing to put out the effort to help clean it up and support it is being ignored. That makes them stupid. Any reasonable web professional sees DMOZ as a putrid burden.

Huh? paradoxical? complaining?

How can DMOZ know if a listing was hijacked or not?

If they responded in a reasonable fashon to the owner of the domain,
maybe they could find out from him if it had been hijacked or not.
If DMOZ used decient algo's and methods, listings couldn't get hijacked.

You seem to have the hots for DMOZ. Most think everyone associated are a joke, are you?.

DMOZ is disgusting, and most of your assumptions are not only wrong, but you TOO show little or no facts.
He said "add to that the stories about volunteer editors requesting payment to list"
Uh, he said "the stories', he never claimed that the payments were facts.

You need to get off your jag with DMOZ and be a bit less defensive.

__________________
http://MADEinUSA.org and others.

And your facts are?

Link please?

Thanks.

DMOZ Isn’t Open After All

__________________
http://MADEinUSA.org and others.

Facts:
The Open in DMOZ is used to mean that DMOZ's database is open for anyone to use (how many time does that have to be stted before people get it).

DMOZ is not a listing service for webmasters (never has been).

There was a server crash of the old severs that took a long time to restore (you can find your own links to the facts, they have been widely documented).

You seem to be under the impression that DMOZ owes you some sort of service. What sort of sevice are you expecting? How much are you paying for that service? Maybe you should ask for a refund.

I dont think DMOZ owes webmasters anything. They choose who they want to allow in or not. It is just to bad that many categories go unedited or forgotten and webmasters that do submit real websites are never contacted back about previous submissions.

__________________
KBK Marketing | Search Marketing Blog | Cheap Web Hosting

Webmasters only "suggest" sites (the link at DMOZ does not say "submit"). Editors are free to use whatever source for sites they like and are under no obligation to even look at the suggested sites when looking for sites to build a category. The suggested sites is the worse source of new sites. Some categories just don't get touched by editors, often due to the huge amount of spam that gets suggested.

When a site is suggested, there is a thank you message on the confirmation screen. I am not sure what more than that is of any use to anyone. The site submission status thing at resource zone was a failure and did not provide anything useful to webmasters.

If DMOZ did send information, what would you do with it if:
1) Your site is waiting to be reviewed --> there is nothing more you can do and life goes on
2) Its been moved to another category --> there is nothing more you can do and life goes on
3) Its been listed --> there is nothing more you can do and life goes on
4) Its been rejected --> there is nothing more you can do and life goes on

The only people who would benefit from this are the spammers who will know when and how there latest little scheme has been detected and they can try again. The very people who DMOZ is doing battle with to the detriment of the genuine webmaster.

I can never understand this incredible obsession so many have with DMOZ, when

I would go with pathetic, but with the down spiral that DMOZ has been in for the past 3-4 years, I am not surprised.

If you check Google, they have not updated their DMOZ listing for 2+ years.

I guess the facts get in the way of a good rant again!. The facts were pointed out to you in another thread so not sure why you would continue to be untruthful.

Google have not updated the categories in their Directory from DMOZ for 18 months (NOT 2+ yrs). They have been updating the search function at the Google Dircetory from DMOZ regularly, most recently a few months ago.

Again, I guess the facts get in the way again. What downward spiral?
For the last 3-5 yrs DMOZ has been and still is the largest directory on the www and no other directory comes remotely close.
DMOZ has been and still is the fastest growing directory on the www and no other directory comes remotely close to the growth rate of DMOZ.

And all this depsite the alleged problems. ...it just don't figure!

Pathetic! DMOZ is and has been corrupt for years!
In one of the categories i tried to list a site nothing has happened for the last 2,5 years. I used to submit to DMOZ in the old days when you still got listed.
- eh that's like the times before google 199 something.... In the recent years submitting or "suggesting a site" has been a complete waste of time.

********************************
GOOGLE'S MATT CUTTS SHOULD BE CHALLENGED ON DMOZ - THIS DIRECTORY HAS AN IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF GOOGLE'S INDEX - HASN'T IT??? THEY ARE WITH NO DOUBT MISUSING THEIR POSITION. CORRUPT!

DEAR MATT,
SPAM FIGHTER NO1. TAKE SOME ACTION! HOW CAN GOOGLE USE SUCH A CORRUPT DIRECTORY FOR IF YOU WANT "QUALITY" SEARCH RESULTS?
... - GO AHEAD GUYS ASK THIS QUESTION ON MATTS BLOG.. - ALL OF YOU... ; )

*********************************

It is interesting to note that there are clearly one individual taking part in the discussion here who is part of this FCUKing MOB directory - why otherwise praise this corrupted crap directory?

You scuk and you do it deep - you should be ashamed of yourself! - To spoil a good web directory - it used to be one of the most important projects of modern times.
WASTED. It has been so crappy for the last years that most of the 'editors' would have to get kicked out or even better shot daed - wooops a typo.. Surprisingly there are a bunch of internet marketer still suggesting one should waste time on submitting to DMOZ - what a joke - have they been sleeping for the last 8 years or something ...?
Without doubt DMOZ is deliberately not wanting to keep the directory up to date of purely selfish reasons by editors - or perhaps - it is in some big search engines interest.... ?

- It is a shame that Goofle... oh a typo again... is still using this crap as a important resource. - If it is not Goofles own directory - but then again it is not about quality that both Goofle and DMOZ was supposed to be about...

Just compare DMOZ with Yahoo's Directory - Yahoo's directory is really a pretty damn good source of information! Those of you who haven't visited Yahoos Directory for some time - and I guess that might be pretty many - you should. - No I am not related to Yahoo in any way. But if they would like to hire me for some serious money I would come running...
But again Yahoo got so many things wrong on their Yahoo search marketing side I just cannot belive it. Yahoo got to loose millions of dollars every single day cause of a series of pretty rediculous mistakes. ...
Anyway their search engine is good and provides relevant results - but they got a few flaws in it to that should be fixed if they like people to really use it.
I come to think about one big error that should be fixed to make Yahoos business work - but sorry guys - Yahoo got to hire me before I tell them more about that - anyway it's of topic -... sorry guy's...

But here is another little FREE hint for Yahoo...


*******************************'**
DROP THE PRICE TO 20,- FOR REVIEW ON YAHOO DIRECTORY AND YOU WILL GET MORE SUBMISSIONS TO YOUR DIRECTORY THAN YOU CAN COPE WITH!.. EASY MONEY. WILL CONVERT LIKE CRAZY... - have you ever heard that one before ? ; )
... OK - just give me 5% of that as a recurring commission, ok? YahoooOoooOOoo...??

*********************************

I've said it before - LET'S START A NEW REAL DIRECTORY and you guy's should stop submitting to the fcuking mob at DMOZ.

- HOW MANY ARE IN for a new directory? Ok... so let's start ....
How was it again.. try hard to remember MOBZ rules for editors :
" you should not be interested or related to the field you would like to edit, and absolutely not have a related web-site and have no knowledge of the subject or field you want to edit, you should work for free so that a big search engine can capitalize on your work - and you should do everything to annoy people and webmasters globally just for the fun of it - you will be part of the axis of evil " - but don't worry you will remain anonymous and you can gain a feel of full control - act like a god or like TV preist - ask for money as most webmaster will be desperate to get listed. Perfect money laundry. But it is much more fun just to keep them wasting their time. You get a few thousand possibilities to laugh at people wasting time by submitting quality content to be included - but you don't - you're an editor - now you can feel fcuking important about yourself for doing nothing!

It is UNETHICAL and IRRESPONSIBLE TO WASTE THE TIME OF SO MANY PEOPLE SUBMITTING TO DMOZ WITH NO RESULT - THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF DEVELOPING THE DIRECTORY OR TO INCLUDE YOUR SITE. COMPLETE SIHT HAEDS. DMOZ is a insider thing A FCUKING WEB MAFIA. Just foggedaboutit..

ok I admit
I am truly pssied on SMUZ - no DUMBZ... argh.. you know the name whatever it was...

Yeah Mike it is pathetic - stupid - idiotic - rediculous! Just as you would expect from DMOZ

let's just forgedaboutit....

I'm gonna have a nice cold beer now. This was exhausting - finally i hate those editors at DUMBZ...

Cheers,

Rob Greenbucks

__________________
Robert Greenbucks

Oh... I goooofed again...

__________________
Robert Greenbucks

I think you might be able to see why other sites were included and yours was not.

For example your description tag reads as so

"<meta NAME="Description" CONTENT="Web Design For Fresno, the San Joaquin Valley and Beyond">
This is at best lazy and non descriptive you failed to include the state and simply input words. Here is an example from ODP
A Boulder, Colorado based company that provides designing, and hosting services for businesses and individuals."

OH..my God - gimme a break! What a joke! You got to be part of the DMOZ mob... he said "and beyond" - cannot be included...he said "Web Design for..." that is really hard to understand - what is "web design" about - never heard that term before!
Very hard to figure out what that site might be about....web design (???) hmmm...

Obviously a bad description... - And if it says "for Fresno" it is not specifictly saying they are "based in Fresno" - so again a hopless submission..., right?
Perhaps DMOZ editors are under-estimating the intelligence of readers? Come on do us all a favour - Go buy a rugsack and then try some exciting skydiving!
Just tell me when and where you going to jump and I catch it all on video and post it on YouTube! - You'll be the most famous DMOZ editor ever!

Prime exaple of DMOZ stupidity - what an smart a** - Did you bother to look at the site? Probably not - the submission was of "so poor quality" so you didn't even bother, right?

Wonder how do DMOZ manage to find all these retarded individuals?
- And they didn't even accept me as an editor! - D*mn I tought I was the most stupid guy in the history of mankind - and still not accepted!
- Ok, I got to face it!

Ok - I Confess!
I'm the 2nd most stupid living thing on earth... (oh.. sh-t - I forgot about all the other w*nkers at DUMBz...) - I'm pretty stupid anyway! Promise!
- But HEY! (a glance of HOPE!)
- I feel I'm getting dementia so perhaps you could accept me as an editor for DUMBZ now ? I got altzheimer or something....
1. I promise to do a lot LOW quality work! No, I make it even better I promise I will not even move a finger - In fact I will do nothing at all !
And I'm used to it - so I should be pretty well qualified for DUMBZ ...
I have an unbeatable track-record in this field! I have an extreme talent to fcuk up almost anything (apart from women)! - No, don't get me wrong. I'm not gay, (sorry)!
But I promise I got seriously screwed a few times in business.
In conclusion I am totally hopeless, super lazy - and above all - A superb talent for not doing what I'm supposed to!
Can I become a DUMBZ editor now??

Looking forward hearing from you!

Rob Greenbucks

"Always wanted to become an editor for DUMBZ closed directory"

__________________
Robert Greenbucks

I'm really more interested in discussing why or how it can be justified for DMOZ to delist a site simply because it's owner listed it for sale.

We have plenty of other threads for folks to go vent about the numerous and well documented examples of corruption, inefficiency and questionable value of DMOZ as a whole.

What I want someone to explain to me here is -- why is it justifiable to delist a site because it's being sold?

The hijacking explanation is amusing and all. But can you honestly say (without laughing a little) that you actually expect anyone that has any experience whatsoever with DMOZ to believe they are 'investigating' or 'validating' anything with some intention of restoring the booted listing once their investigation is complete?

Did I read that wrong?

You can't be serious.

__________________
WebProNews Videos

Thank you Mike.It turns out that this is indeed the case.

There is a whole industry set up around detecting and buying and hijacking expired domains that have a listing in DMOZ and the Yahoo Directory (I know your original post was not about expired domains) and then setting up MFA sites on those that have no real value to the category or the surfer or setting up redirects to non-listed sites. DMOZ has some automated tools that does move expired or expiring domains from public view for editors to manually review them, but its far from perfect. So the only way to really detect it is with a manual re-review of all listed sites (which is a monumental task given how often it needs doing and other tasks that editors have).

If a site is sold (or advertised for sale) and is promoted as having a DMOZ listing, that whole group of people who go after the expired domains as a back door way of getting a listing are going to go after trying to buy the site. After the sale these 'hijackers' (or whatever you want to call them) may convert the site away from its original intent; or redirect it to their own site (DMOZ does have tools to detect this, but are not prefect); or convert it to a useless MFA site etc -- whatever they do, most of the potential changes are not detectable by automated tools and can only be done by manual review (how often do you think editors should manually re-review the the 5 million listed sites?).

Obviously a site that is for sale and is promoted as having a DMOZ listing is at high risk for this sort of think happening. SO the simiplest way is to move those at risk from public view for a later re-review. If it no longer has a listing, then the 'hijackers' won't be interested in it. Hopefully then, the new owner is legitimatly interested in the site and its quality and unique content and the re-review puts it back on public view.

I see this as being a proactive positive stance to deal with the issues of these types of potential hijacks with sites at high risk. Is this not a sensible strategy? (obviously those who want to get a good price for their site won't be happy!)

Do you have another way that DMOZ should be dealing with this? DO you have any idea just how often these hijacks take place and how big this hijack industry is? (I really don't know why they bother as a DMOZ listing is not worth that much and the always get found eventually)

DMOZ does not have editors scouring the websites that are for sale looking for these - an editor must have accidently came across the 'for sales'.

Also, keep in mind that the site(s) that did promote themselves as being for sale with a DMOZ listing might have initiated an editor to look at the site out of curiosity and a re-review decided that the site no longer met the criteria for a listing or has changed since the origial listing or was listed by mistake in the first place. Even if they weren't for sale they may have been removed as they may no longer meet the listing criteria.

I guess the DMOZ bashers will find something negative to rant about everything DMOZ does and this is just another eg of that.

I don't know... I still think it's a bad policy.

You can call it a "proactive positive stance" but it sounds more like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me.

Yes, I know how hijacking works and yes I know it's an issue.

Guilty until proven innocent just doesn't sit too well with me as a "proactive positive stance".

Smells more like Salem in the 1690s.

And I guess why I qualify as a DMOZ basher...

Statements like "an editor must have accidently came across the 'for sales'." Is another reason.

Like there's no way an editor would ever ever be looking for any reason whatsoever to thin out a category where his site/sites/personal interests stand to benefit form one less link. No not at DMOZ. No way. Not in a million years.

The number one thing that gets on my nerves about DMOZ -- at risk of running the thread off topic again -- is the penchant most of it's supporters have for INSISTING that there are 65,000+ people editing that thing and NONE of them would EVER do anything contrary to the unbiased betterment of the directory.

Please.

__________________
WebProNews Videos

I guess we would have to just agree to disagree on this one.
Given the high profile that issue has become, rest assured a lot of senior editors would have looked at this and any editor that acted improperly in doing this will, by now, no longer be an editor.I don't think anyone would disagree with that. A small percent of DMOZ editors are corrupt; a small percent of police are corrupt; a small percent of the clergy are corrupt. Where we disagree is that I do not think that, that makes DMOZ, the police or the church as organizations corrupt. There are mechanisms in place to look for this in all instituitions and deal with it.

Dear Mike

Here is the final input I would like to offer on DMOZ.

Has DMOZ in any way effected the success of WebProWorld?

I know in my business it has had no effect positively or negatively and in all honesty I worry more about whether or not I have 49 gray hairs or 50.......

DMOZ


Dead

Man

On

Zemoon

Who cares??

We should pile DMOZ, PageRank and Google Updates all in one large non relevant to success wastebasket......


Peace

__________________
Create Your List!!!
Make Money With Twitter!!!

So why do you keep posting about it? By posting about it, you are obviously making it relevenat. You obviously are not reading the thread before you post, otherwise you would have seen this: