Is my site now acceptable?

From my point of view the company that actually makes the software that you claim to be yours is http://editorsoftware.com is in fact listed in http://editors.dmoz.org/Arts/Writers_Resources/Software/

If you have any proof that in fact you wrote the software, and they did not, then feel free to post it here. I will then contact that company, and tell them that their listing from ODP is likely to be removed. If not then I suggest you apologize for making misleading statements.

essaytown, if you claim a list of, say, eight unique things, and the first one turns out to be non-nunique, that hurts your credibility.

#1 has been reviewed, and you really need to understand what's been said there. The content is neither unique nor is it relevant to the category. (We list software elsewhere.) We're not saying you shouldn't put it on your site. We're just saying it can't possibly be relevant to the question of whether or where the site might be listable.


#3 is listed in the parent category. You can hardly say we're shortchanging you there, can we?

#6, currency converter, may be a convenience for customers, but it's not unique.

#7: is there an inconvenient Paypal method? And I'm not sure that a method of payment is unique enough to be considered. Normally, we think of "UNIQUE services provided" as something more than "take order, take money, pass money and order to someone else to provide service." But with all those words, there wasn't anything that suggested the site was anything more than a combination of aggregated promotional doorway (at least, so far as content relevant to this category.)

#8: If you got the point on #1, you'll understand why what you SAID must be irrelevant, although somewhere behind it might be a relevant fact. We don't care what you advertise, we care what unique good or service you offer. Not, note well "aggregate combination of typically mutually exclusive services."

If three other sites offer the three services you offer, and they have a more authoritative (or indeed just a chronologically prior) offering, then your content isn't unique and would not qualify the site for being reviewed.

You're still not talking the language of unique content offerings, which is why you're not being persuasive.

hutcheson said:

essaytown, if you claim a list of, say, eight unique things, and the first one turns out to be non-nunique, that hurts your credibility.

Click to expand...

Can you please at least acknowledge that I am being as honest and forthcoming as possible? I have admitted everything I know, and have offered to contact former employees, if necessary. To the best of my ability, I have done what you suggested.

As I have previously stated to another editor, the software is part of an AFFILIATE program. At no time did I state that I personally WROTE the software. I am not a software engineer. I am an editor and author. I am sorry if I confused you with semantics, or my use of the word "my." I always use the word "my" when referring to a product or service offered through my site. The person who actually wrote the software contacted my company and proposed a partnership. I sell the software through my site, and he posts my link on his "Links" page. He explained to me all the details of the software. If you do not believe me, you are certainly free to contact that company yourself. And again, the software would be merely one of my many unique offerings in the category (http://dmoz.org/Reference/Education/Products_and_Services/Academic_Papers/Fee_Based/).

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, no site in the industry (let alone the category) is more authorative/informative than EssayTown. And, if you review the records, you will see that EssayTown was first listed in the category about 4 years ago--long before several of the currently listed companies, such as "MegaEssays."

As further proof of the uniqueness of my site, at no time did I ever submit my "Industry Warning" page (http://www.essaytown.com/warning.html) for inclusion in ODP. However, an ODP editor independently located that page, realized that it has exceptionally unique value to both students and educators, and posted the page on his/her own. (However, I would certainly prefer that my home page be re-listed at http://dmoz.org/Reference/Education/Products_and_Services/Academic_Papers/Fee_Based/) It seems that you have already made up your mind no matter what further evidence I present to you regarding #s 1, 3, 6, 7, and 8. In light of that understanding, may we concentrate on #s 2, 4, and 5? Those are absolutely, undeniably unique, and clearly linked on my home page:

---------------------
2. Search Engine
Please, try conducting a search through my search engine, using any keyword of your choice. You will clearly see that my papers are 100% unique and totally different from any of the papers offered by any other site in the category. That is my MAIN service, and it is utterly unique. Isn't the fact that I offer at least 30,000+ unique papers sufficient justification--alone--to reinstate my site?

4. FREE, 24-page writing guide
http://www.essaytown.com/EssayTown_writing_guide.pdf
I invite you to download my FREE guide in order to judge its unique value. The owners of other sites in the category have neither the ability nor the desire to provide such high quality, FREE material/advice. Even if they DID have the ability, they would never willingly provide any information that could possibly help/enable customers to complete material on their own, without submitting any payments. I take it upon myself to go the extra mile, regardless of how it may adversely affect my sales.

5. College writing features
http://www.essaytown.com/features.html
Again, the owners of other sites in the category have neither the ability nor the desire to provide such material.

Custom Research (not previously singled-out)
The very nature of "custom research" entails that each and every document is 100% new, original, and--most importantly--UNIQUE. Customers would NEVER agree to pay such a premium price at EssayTown if that were not the case! Customers pay a much higher price based on one important guarantee--UNIQUENESS! The simple fact is that if you were to personally place the EXACT SAME "custom research" order through my site and through one of the other sites currently listed in the category, you would receive two completely different papers, as they would be written by two completely different writers. Indeed, multiple sites offer a service called "Custom Research," but, by the very nature of that service, each paper produced by each company is 100% unique and utterly unrelated to each paper produced by any other company. And, I can assure you that the quality of my materials cannot be matched.
---------------------

I'm sure that by now you can tell that I am a well-versed, intelligent, passionate, educated person. I provide the highest quality material to my customers, and my writers are the cream-of-the-crop. I except and allow nothing less. Don't ODP surfers deserve such? One thing is for certain--my site would make a much better contribution than any of the following:



Under construction:
http://www.greatpapers.net

Doesn't load:
http://www.myresearchpapers.com

404 error
http://www.friendlyjim.com/Saudi_Paper_Help/

Yes, definitely let's focus on the possibly unique.

But first, a couple of asides:

The amount of time spent developing a site is not a issue for us. Some sites are very well-polished, intensely-promoted buffalo patties. Others are diamonds in the rough. We try to judge based on composition.

BTW, thanks for the tips on the broken links.

I am puzzled, though, that you say the site was listed years ago: our records do not show that it ever was. (It may have been under another URL, or there have been a very few glitches in the site logs. For whatever reason, there seems to be no record of it being added or deleted. That doesn't either favor or disfavor it being reviewed in the future. The issues right now are the site right now (though the history of the related sites may become relevant.)

hutcheson said:

Yes, definitely let's focus on the possibly unique.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I'm not sure where this leaves me, however. Did you review the info below from my previous post? I'm afraid that if I simply submit the site again, it will be flagged as "SPAM" and/or be judged by the old comments/reviews currently in your system. Please advise, and once again, I cannot communicate in words how much I appreciate your attention.

---------------------
2. Search Engine
Please, try conducting a search through my search engine, using any keyword of your choice. You will clearly see that my papers are 100% unique and totally different from any of the papers offered by any other site in the category. That is my MAIN service, and it is utterly unique. Isn't the fact that I offer at least 30,000+ unique papers sufficient justification--alone--to reinstate my site?

4. FREE, 24-page writing guide
http://www.essaytown.com/EssayTown_writing_guide.pdf
I invite you to download my FREE guide in order to judge its unique value. The owners of other sites in the category have neither the ability nor the desire to provide such high quality, FREE material/advice. Even if they DID have the ability, they would never willingly provide any information that could possibly help/enable customers to complete material on their own, without submitting any payments. I take it upon myself to go the extra mile, regardless of how it may adversely affect my sales.

5. College writing features
http://www.essaytown.com/features.html
Again, the owners of other sites in the category have neither the ability nor the desire to provide such material.

Custom Research (not previously singled-out)
The very nature of "custom research" entails that each and every document is 100% new, original, and--most importantly--UNIQUE. Customers would NEVER agree to pay such a premium price at EssayTown if that were not the case! Customers pay a much higher price based on one important guarantee--UNIQUENESS! The simple fact is that if you were to personally place the EXACT SAME "custom research" order through my site and through one of the other sites currently listed in the category, you would receive two completely different papers, as they would be written by two completely different writers. Indeed, multiple sites offer a service called "Custom Research," but, by the very nature of that service, each paper produced by each company is 100% unique and utterly unrelated to each paper produced by any other company. And, I can assure you that the quality of my materials cannot be matched.
---------------------

Just a quick note regarding EssayTown's previous placement in the category:
I assure you that www.essaytown.com was listed in the category for approximately 2 years, starting approximately 4 years ago (roughly 2000-2002). I have no idea why such records are not appearing in your system. For your reference, I was able to locate a third-party directory that, for some reason, hasn't updated its ODP content for at least 2 years. You can see that "Essay Town" is listed:

http://www.kangaroo-directory.com/R...ducts_and_Services/Academic_Papers/Fee_Based/

What makes you think an editor who reviews your site is going to be one posts here? We are few and far between my friend. In my honest opinion, having not reviewed your site but basing my opinion on what has been posted by other editors in this thread - you have very little chance of a listing. You should probably pursue other promotional venues. My 2 cents (have not looked at your site) - very important fact here - if I looked up your software and saw it on multiple other sites would have rejected - if looked up some of the other content and found it on other sites probably would have rejected or left in unreviewed with a note. Does not look good for you. You are digging a hole here. I suggest you move on. Again my 2 cents.

thehelper said:

What makes you think an editor who reviews your site is going to be one posts here? We are few and far between my friend. In my honest opinion, having not reviewed your site but basing my opinion on what has been posted by other editors in this thread - you have very little chance of a listing. You should probably pursue other promotional venues. My 2 cents (have not looked at your site) - very important fact here - if I looked up your software and saw it on multiple other sites would have rejected - if looked up some of the other content and found it on other sites probably would have rejected or left in unreviewed with a note. Does not look good for you. You are digging a hole here. I suggest you move on. Again my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

I respect hutcheson for taking the time to actually review certain aspects of my site before blindly condemning based on completely outdated ODP "notes" about my site. The negative comments about my site that you have read in previous posts in this thread are from editors who did not review my site (like you) before commenting and/or based their quick-to-judge opinion on years-old notes regarding my site in ODP's editor admin section, which are no longer relevant to my completely re-written, 2004 site. Thank you, but hutcheson is familiar with my situation and efforts, and he has the power to make edits in my prospective category, as evidenced by the 3 sites that he immediately removed after I pointed out their inactive status earlier today. (A fourth site at http://www.ccthomson.net/essays/ is also inactive.) I am waiting for his reply.

Just a couple of quick points:

1. Any meta editor or editall would respopnd almost immediately to reports of broken links in our directory. Reacting to broken links is a major priority and iswhy we have a discussion thread in another location on this forum just for that purpose.

2. Any editor is welcome to repond to any thread. Hutcheson is not your "private" editor, he is under no obligation to return to this thread, and your suggestion that you are only waiting for him is highly disrespectful to the other editors who contribute their time to this forum.

3. Comments like: "before commenting and/or based their quick-to-judge opinion on years-old notes regarding my site in ODP's editor admin section, which are no longer relevant to my completely re-written, 2004 site." are ill-researched. You do not know what an editor has or has not looked at. Further, you do not know the content of the historical editor notes. In fact, The Helper clearly stated that he was basing his opinion solely on what has transpired in this thread.

4. Regarding uniqueness: there is absolutely, positively nothing unique about a search engine. It doesn't matter how wonderful you think it is.

Frankly, I think that this thread needs to be closed. You are arguing an editorial decision, which goes way beyond the scope of what is allowed in this forum. To quote the guidelines:

If your site has been rejected, please keep in mind that arguing about the editorial decision will not be tolerated. Please note that at the bottom of the "add URL" screen it says "Netscape and the ODP have unfettered editorial discretion to determine the structure and content of the directory" and "a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time"

Click to expand...

I have been nothing but polite and respectful. I refer to hutcheson simply because he is the only editor who seems to understand or respect what I've gone through for the last two years! He requested that I follow certain protocol regarding divulging certain information to him, and I have done so. Therefore, I am waiting for his review of the information that he suggested I provide. Please, like all others, I request that you read the entire thread before passing judgement.

As for your opinion of my search engine, all I can say is that you are incorrect. Yes, there is nothing unique about a "search engine" in general. However, as I stated in great detail previously, my search RESULTS are 100% unique and not available through any other site in the category. Why don't you compare my search results to the results of any/all of the other sites in the category? I absolutely guarantee that my 30,000+ papers are not available through any of the other sites currently listed in the category. (You don't think that ODP surfers will find unique value in a highly-organized selection of 30,000+ additional papers from which they may choose? As of right now, those 30,000 papers are NOT available to them.) Use any keyword(s) of your choice. That is all I ask! For your convenience, below are all the sites in the category that have a working search engine:

http://www.academicresearchpapers.com
http://www.researchpaperlibrary.com
http://www.cheathouse.com
http://www.edupapers.net
http://www.megaessays.com
http://www.myessays.com
http://www.papers4less.com
http://www.research-assistance.com

Now, please compare the results of any/all of the sites above with the search results from MY site:
http://www.essaytown.com

I simply would like someone to review the evidence before claiming that I have no unique content. You do not believe that a total of 30,000+ research papers that are 100% unique does not constitute "unique" content? If that is the case, all of the sites listed above should be removed because they all have a "search engine." Of course, I don't believe they should be removed because the search results for any given keyword are completely different from each site.

Ok I took the challenge - I only did one search "vitamin deficiency" - I get Free Summary of Paper #1974 -- the contents of which are remarkably similar to

http://www.academon.com/lib/paper/1974.html which was very easy to find on Google, no need for a custom search engine.

OK lets try another - maybe that was just bad luck - "experimental rat" - leads me to Free Summary of Paper #38 Reason and Individualism in Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" and Yevgeny Zamyatin's " We"

Now that seems to be the same as

http://www.academon.com/lib/paper/38.html

http://www.accountingtermpapers.com/lib/essay/accounting-and-technology.html paper #38

http://www.term-paper.net/lib/essay/term-paper-38.html

bobrat said:

OK lets try another - maybe that was just bad luck - "experimental rat" - leads me to Free Summary of Paper #38 Reason and Individualism in Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" and Yevgeny Zamyatin's " We"

Now that seems to be the same as

http://www.academon.com/lib/paper/38.html

http://www.accountingtermpapers.com/lib/essay/accounting-and-technology.html paper #38

http://www.term-paper.net/lib/essay/term-paper-38.html

Click to expand...

By what set of rules are you judging my site? There is no ODP rule against a company having multiple Web sites, as long as those multiple sites are NOT listed in ODP. The sites you mention are affiliate sites that I do not own. I also cannot find any of them anywhere in the ODP. Even if I DID own those sites, how is their existence in Google (or whatever search engine you used to find them) at all relevant to my situation or the ODP guidelines? I am simply requesting that, after two years of hard work in completely re-designing my site and writing 30,000+ UNIQUE papers to meet ODP standards, you allow me to have ONE site listed in the category. You are supposed to compare my site to the sites already listed in the ODP category, correct? Am I wrong about that? I even provided in my previous post a list of the sites currently posted in the category that offer a search engine. You did not compare my search results to those sites, which is the only relevant comparison. Can you please focus on the relevant facts and evidence? From the ODP submission guidelines:

"Do not submit URLs that contain only the same or similar content as other sites you may have listed in the directory.* Sites with overlapping and repetitive content are not helpful to users of the directory."

Neither my site--nor the sites you have mentioned--are listed in the directory. My papers are 100% unique to the ODP and its surfers.

Going back through the logs, it makes me sick to think how many editor hours have been spent weeding through all your affiliates/related sites, dealing with the abusive behavior of your employees, responding to innappropriate and frivolous submissions and update requests, tracking down your mirrors, and responding to this thread.

It makes me think of that scene from Lilo and Stich where Lilo explains why she was late to dance class and her instructor asks "Lilo, Why is this so important?"

Her response, "Because Pudge controls the weather."

I ask you, "Why is this so important?"

I believe the answer from any rational human being would be "It's not."

Submit the site, an editor will review it. If that editor finds it to be worth including, they'll include it. If not, there are millions of other places on the web to market your site.

writing 30,000+ UNIQUE papers

Click to expand...

My point is there's nothing unique about your papers.

And it seems very clear that when you said my software it turned out it was not your software, it's clear that your papers are not your papers.

Unique, I think not.

This is beyond frustrating. The search engine seems not to be unique either.

Now, this is going far beyond the level of analysis we've done on hundreds of rejected sites in this area. Our mission is to lead users to unique content. If a site claims something is unique, and it turns out not to be, then the editor should assume the webmaster is using the same idiosyncratic definition of "unique" throughout the site -- and nuke the submittal with prejudice right there.

So, in not one but two different ways, even if what had been found already had not already been enough, this search engine is conclusive. (1) It suggests the affiliate-banner-farm definition of "unique" is in effect for the whole site, and (2) Observing that hundreds of the pages of the site are simply doorways into the search engine, and there appear to be a bare handful of other relevant pages on the site, a reasonable editor must conclude that the primary purpose of the site is to drive commercial traffic to that search engine. (Indeed, an editor could easily conclude that the search engine doorways were the only relevant content of the site. There is nothing on the site to indicate that the "we" of the search engine is any different from the "we" of any other services, or indeed to indicate that the 30,000 essays are not to be found only in the search engine, if any editor were to go that far, which we expect them not to do because having made that last determination, the editor terminates the review and rejects the site, by staff fiat.

And this is all without regard for which site owns the search engine. In such a affiliate-spam-ridden area as Fee-based Essays, if we can't identify the real proprietor of content, but we can identify that it is one of the "usual affiliate suspects", we don't list it. It does not get the benefit of the doubt. It gets the benefit of our experience.

>after two years of hard work in completely re-designing my site

I believe someone has already stated that this is irrelevant. But ... perhaps not completely irrelevant. It is certainly designed for spamming search engine results (with all those template-driven doorway pages into the search engine -- a major plague for Google users right now: your few hundred pages are a trifle, but other SERP perps are generating tens or hundreds of thousands of doorway pages daily.) And it's certainly designed for driving the search engine using the old "all links lead to Rome" trick that we've learned to associate with the more sneaky kinds of affiliate sites.

>You are supposed to compare my site to the sites already listed in the ODP category, correct?

No (and this is very important) that is absolutely not true at all. Word to the wise: There IS a reason none of those three sites are listed, and that reason is NOT that none of them were ever submitted, nor is it that none of them were ever reviewed by disinterested editors. We're not going to try to track down the original owner of that search engine. (Some editors that work in that area a lot may alreay know who it is, but it doesn't matter.)

I concluded that the site as it stands is not listable, and that any editor who has read the guidelines will agree.

This is not quite the same thing as saying the company couldn't have created a listable site. The key is "unique content."

Now 30,000 essays that nobody else has or offers would be unique content. (I don't know how many essays the search engine finds -- my gut feeling based on sampling would have been "a few thousands but not thirty thousand".) And that could be a basis for a website. I just don't see how it could be said that it's the basis for this website.

Good lord, why do you even have such a category? Doesn't this border on illegal content?

Aslong as the content is real and not stolen it is not illegal.
But I know of a lot of schools who think using their services is illegal. I know that the universities in the country I live in have created a special software program that can checks essays written by students. And if your essay is found to be written by someone else .... it's bye-bye

And if your essay is found to be written by someone else .... it's bye-bye

Click to expand...

Same in the UK.

hutcheson said:

I concluded that the site as it stands is not listable, and that any editor who has read the guidelines will agree.

This is not quite the same thing as saying the company couldn't have created a listable site. The key is "unique content."

Now 30,000 essays that nobody else has or offers would be unique content. (I don't know how many essays the search engine finds -- my gut feeling based on sampling would have been "a few thousands but not thirty thousand".) And that could be a basis for a website. I just don't see how it could be said that it's the basis for this website.

Click to expand...

So now you are saying that it is wrong to put a link to my search engine on every new page that I create? How could that possibly be considered WRONG? As far as I know, there is a search box and universal links on EVERY page of ODP. Does that make ODP guilty a SPAMming? Of course not! Is ODP the greatest "doorway" abuser of them all? I think not. I simply want users to have quick access to my search engine no matter where they go on my site. How sinful of both me and ODP to have such thinking!

So much for honesty, hutcheson. I did exactly what you suggested, and I got crucified for it. I hope everyone got whatever amusement they were looking for . . . .

My site is CLEARLY more professional, well-written, authoritative, forthcoming, and comprehensive than all other listed sites in every possible way. It's funny that not a SINGLE editor--even you--has acknowledged my "free, 24-page, PDF writing guide," my "writing features" page, or my "custom research" service that provides a 100% unique paper for EVERY order. And just so you know, there are, INDEED, 30000+ papers in my search engine. How you could possibly claim otherwise is both absurd and arrogant.

The bottom line is that you are robbing ODP surfers of substantial, UNIQUE content. You know it. I know it. You purposely harp on what you believe to be negatives, and do your best to manufacture new negatives on the fly. You utterly ignore all positives, and conveniently do NOT acknowledge anything for which you do not have a quick, quirky rebuttal. Thank you so very much for your biased viewpoints and ill-informed damnation. You have proven to be the EPITOME of "unfair" and "unreasonable."