Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymously
2. One also has to say that people offering sites really do not bother to read what is actually there, often they want to believe what they want to believe. Who bothers to read http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/ ? Take that with the Category Descriptions and you will know as much as those editing the site. |
You don't have to tell that to me. I know about morons who are ignoring Guidelines as much as you do. I am not talking about some spammer at all; I am talking about people who know how to write Title and Description. People who have no attention to spam your pending bin and give you enough reasons to list their sites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymously
If lots of sites are selling widgets we would not expect that they use exactly the same descriptions and any selfrespecting site will ensure they are different and stand out anyway and provided they were obviously not copies, mirrors or affiliates two sites selling widgets which were different companies would be listed because they would be unique because of them being different companies.
I have at the moment in my bookmarks a company that markets the same stuff, with same descriptions on 7 different named sites and different named companies, do you think we are going to list them all? That is what they would like. But only the main one will be listed.
On another forum some one asked about a site and when I checked it was clear they had ripped the information from another site and tried to pas it off as their own, I told them there was no way they would be listed.
|
Again, I am more than satisfied with your spam policies and I don't care about garbage you sweep under rug day in day out. Yes, sites that use Yahoo store are all the same even though they are using different domains. The same applies to millions of pharmacy, gambling and lineup of other mirror image sites. My question is about your "unique" concept and how you apply it to sites that deserve to be taking seriously even though they might be covering the same subjects but from different perspective and point of view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymously
As you well know Jim was saying that ODP will make its own decisions about how it conducts its own directory.
|
With all due respect to Jim, and I mean it, because I read his posts and know that Jim happen to be decent man who stack in the wrong place, I don't think he has misspoke this time. You Editors act as if you own DMOZ
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymously
You have a nice way of twisting words. None of us do actually edit everywhere in the directory all of the time. Some editors have the right to do that but we usually function in the areas we are interested in and know something about so I would not go looking in areas that I had no interest in editing. There are stacks of categories and stacks of sites that need my attention in areas that I want to edit in because they interest me and I know a bit about them. Fortunately we have editors with different areas of interest and expertize and so the directory as a whole gets good coverage from the numbers of editors we have. Though we can still do with more editors..
|
Look who is talking. No, my friend you are the one who "have a nice way of twisting words". Keep your praises for hard working Editors for your next post in resource-zone forum when you will brush off another "sorry looser" asking you why his site is not in your index after 3 years of waiting. Lets talk about sites your "experts" wouldn't index because of conflict of interest or simply because of lack of interest by Editor
fastreplies