Can a site be permanently banished from the ODP? I have taken control of a website and have found out from current and previous employees that the site has been banned from the ODP for spamming. Now that the site is under new technical and managerial control, is it possible to get a site re-reviewed for removal from a black list. It doesn't seem fair to punish a site and staff for the actions of prior employees who may have acted un-ethically.
Permanent Site Banishment?
- Thread starter qqodpf
- Start date
No problem. I just didn't want to give shameless plugs and make it seem like I am looking for a review.
The site url is http://www.quickquote.com
The site url is http://www.quickquote.com
Generally the technical and managerial control is not what gets a site panned. It's the content. If the relevant content has changed significantly, then mention, at the end of the suggested description of the submittal what was changed: [new owners have replaced the former content with blablabla....]
I certainly hope a content change / update is all it is.
That doesn't seem to be what I have been told, and maybe I have been misinformed. It seems our site was listed in the ODP and was removed. When the editor of the category was contacted (msculley I believe was the editor at the time, but has since disappeared from the editor list) as to it's removal he said an editor above him removed it and it appeared to be due to a past history with perceived spamming. The editor said he personally thought it was a beneficial site to include in the directory, but the powers that be saw it different. Like I say I hope you are correct in that they saw it differently due to lack of content as opposed to history of spamming.
That doesn't seem to be what I have been told, and maybe I have been misinformed. It seems our site was listed in the ODP and was removed. When the editor of the category was contacted (msculley I believe was the editor at the time, but has since disappeared from the editor list) as to it's removal he said an editor above him removed it and it appeared to be due to a past history with perceived spamming. The editor said he personally thought it was a beneficial site to include in the directory, but the powers that be saw it different. Like I say I hope you are correct in that they saw it differently due to lack of content as opposed to history of spamming.
Lead Generation? (Please don't mistake this as an argument, I am intending it to be more of a query) If you could tell me how we are a lead generation site I would appreciate it. We have one product line (auto insurance) that leads to another site. All other product lines that we list we do in house (from insurance quote to policy issuance). I don't see how our core model differs from that of an included site like insure.com.
Like I said, I am not trying to be argumentative, but just trying to relay my perspective of how I perceive our site. I am not aware of lead generation that our site does other than give insurance quotes and the subsequent applications. I guess you could say we generate leads for insurance companies. Again if you could expand on lead generation I would appreciate it.
Like I said, I am not trying to be argumentative, but just trying to relay my perspective of how I perceive our site. I am not aware of lead generation that our site does other than give insurance quotes and the subsequent applications. I guess you could say we generate leads for insurance companies. Again if you could expand on lead generation I would appreciate it.
Could you point me to a document on the DMOZ site that may be able to explain it (other than the submission guidelines which I have read)?
I also fear that our site may be mis-associated with other sites that use the QuickQuote name. We have it trademarked, but being a small business we cannot really go after sites that infringe the trademark. I am aware of many sites that brandish the word QuickQuote on their site, however we have no affiliation with them (only www.quickquote.com).
That was my plea, and thank you all for the information I have received thus, far and any further information that may come.
I also fear that our site may be mis-associated with other sites that use the QuickQuote name. We have it trademarked, but being a small business we cannot really go after sites that infringe the trademark. I am aware of many sites that brandish the word QuickQuote on their site, however we have no affiliation with them (only www.quickquote.com).
That was my plea, and thank you all for the information I have received thus, far and any further information that may come.
This request may fall on deaf ears, however, if someone could give me a little time, it would help me clear things up.
Lead generation has been mentioned with our site (http://www.quickquote.com). I don't think it is lead generation, but the DMOZ may have a different idea of lead generation than I do. Is it because we take application requests for insurance? If so anyone will see we have licensed agents and contact information to get in contact with them. I would think this would move us from pure lead generation to a bonified business. Am I mistaken?
Anyway if some editor, or someone familiar with guidelines for the category
Top:Business:Financial Services:Insurance:Agents and Marketers:Multi-Line:United States:Multi-State
could tell me if our site doesn't follow guidelines I would appreciate it.
Lead generation has been mentioned with our site (http://www.quickquote.com). I don't think it is lead generation, but the DMOZ may have a different idea of lead generation than I do. Is it because we take application requests for insurance? If so anyone will see we have licensed agents and contact information to get in contact with them. I would think this would move us from pure lead generation to a bonified business. Am I mistaken?
Anyway if some editor, or someone familiar with guidelines for the category
Top:Business:Financial Services:Insurance:Agents and Marketers:Multi-Line:United States:Multi-State
could tell me if our site doesn't follow guidelines I would appreciate it.
spectregunner
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2003
- Messages
- 8,768
Did you privately contact The Helper as he asked you to do?
In an attempt to make this a more general thread, I will try to stop using my site as an example when I bring up some ideas.
It seems to me editors are inundated with spam that originates with user requests for inclusion in the ODP. I get this impression from reading posts where editors say the submissions are only a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to finding sites. Instead most rely on their own discovery methods (doing their own searching, local advertisements, national advertisement....). Is this because the submissions have become laden with spam suggestions? I certainly have that impression.
Another impression I have gotten from reading many editor responses is that certain categories are more prone to spam submissions than others. One for example ( I can't recollect the thread) is the various real-estate directories. Is this a correct assumption?
If my assumptions are true, it would seem a site could get blacklisted. I don't reckon it would be a "banishment" endorsed by the ODP, but among a circle of editors sites / categories may build a reputation as being spammy, and therefore have close to no chance of being included because it will never get reviewed. Thus when a user submits a site, if it is submitted to a spam rich category it most likely never gets seen, and if the site happens to be reputed as being a typical spam site it again will never be reviewed despite progress that may have been made on the site.
Is this an accurate picture I have painted for myself?
Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
It seems to me editors are inundated with spam that originates with user requests for inclusion in the ODP. I get this impression from reading posts where editors say the submissions are only a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to finding sites. Instead most rely on their own discovery methods (doing their own searching, local advertisements, national advertisement....). Is this because the submissions have become laden with spam suggestions? I certainly have that impression.
Another impression I have gotten from reading many editor responses is that certain categories are more prone to spam submissions than others. One for example ( I can't recollect the thread) is the various real-estate directories. Is this a correct assumption?
If my assumptions are true, it would seem a site could get blacklisted. I don't reckon it would be a "banishment" endorsed by the ODP, but among a circle of editors sites / categories may build a reputation as being spammy, and therefore have close to no chance of being included because it will never get reviewed. Thus when a user submits a site, if it is submitted to a spam rich category it most likely never gets seen, and if the site happens to be reputed as being a typical spam site it again will never be reviewed despite progress that may have been made on the site.
Is this an accurate picture I have painted for myself?
Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
Alucard
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 5,920
There are ways within the system to be able to determine whether a site has a history and this can be made visible to editors such that it is easier to distinguish them from the other submissions. This is not a black-list, though - any submission needs to be reviewed. What might happen is that editors will choose to review the ones that are more obviously useful to the category before those which most likely are not.
I'm sure you will understand that we are not at liberty to go into technical details of the various systems and methods that the ODP and its editors have for identifying, sorting and eliminating potential spam or malicious submitters, but there are many.
The main problem is that submissions are made to catergories where they just don't belong. Usually because submitters haven't bothered to read the guidelines for the category they are submitting to.
For example, I edit the english-language Austria category. There is a big warning in English and in German about how these categories are not for sites which are only written in German. You will not BELIEVE how many German-only submissions we get in thos categories. These sites aren't spam - they have a place in the ODP. But now, my job as a responsible editor is to FIND it, and move the site there. Luckily, I speak a little German, but it still takes up a load of time.
The real estate isn't a category that is the problem. Our guidelines talk about Real Estate should be submitted to the locality where the office is based. I barely see ONE that is submitted like that. Again, the site isn't necessarily spam - it is listable in the locality. But now I have to open up the site, find the address of the office and then find the category that corresponds to that locality. A lot of time WASTED because a submitter couldn't be bothered to do a little homework. (Note that I almost never will review that site at that time - I just move it to the unreveiwed pile for the new category - I don't see why I should favour this type of submitter over one that has done their homework and submitted to the correct category.)
Now, please don't get me wrong - I know that the ODP is difficult to find a category - I have to do it a LOT, and I keep finding places in the directory that surprise me, because I never knew they existed. So I don't mind it that submitters don't "know all the rules", but when those same submitters come onto Resource Zone and complain about how long it is taking to have their site listed (without bothering to read the forum guidelines here, either) then my patience can get a little frayed.
I hope this has explained that not all of what editors consider "spam" (i.e. not useful to the category it is suggested in) is something we can flag as such. But it is something that we have to spend a LOT of our time sorting through. If I have a nice Chamber of Commerce site which lists 20 business that are in a locality, you can bet I would MUCH rather list those, than try to filter my way through 20 potential mis-submitted sites in a category.
Sorry about the long ramble - but I wanted to give you a slice of the experience of being an ODP editor.
I'm sure you will understand that we are not at liberty to go into technical details of the various systems and methods that the ODP and its editors have for identifying, sorting and eliminating potential spam or malicious submitters, but there are many.
The main problem is that submissions are made to catergories where they just don't belong. Usually because submitters haven't bothered to read the guidelines for the category they are submitting to.
For example, I edit the english-language Austria category. There is a big warning in English and in German about how these categories are not for sites which are only written in German. You will not BELIEVE how many German-only submissions we get in thos categories. These sites aren't spam - they have a place in the ODP. But now, my job as a responsible editor is to FIND it, and move the site there. Luckily, I speak a little German, but it still takes up a load of time.
The real estate isn't a category that is the problem. Our guidelines talk about Real Estate should be submitted to the locality where the office is based. I barely see ONE that is submitted like that. Again, the site isn't necessarily spam - it is listable in the locality. But now I have to open up the site, find the address of the office and then find the category that corresponds to that locality. A lot of time WASTED because a submitter couldn't be bothered to do a little homework. (Note that I almost never will review that site at that time - I just move it to the unreveiwed pile for the new category - I don't see why I should favour this type of submitter over one that has done their homework and submitted to the correct category.)
Now, please don't get me wrong - I know that the ODP is difficult to find a category - I have to do it a LOT, and I keep finding places in the directory that surprise me, because I never knew they existed. So I don't mind it that submitters don't "know all the rules", but when those same submitters come onto Resource Zone and complain about how long it is taking to have their site listed (without bothering to read the forum guidelines here, either) then my patience can get a little frayed.
I hope this has explained that not all of what editors consider "spam" (i.e. not useful to the category it is suggested in) is something we can flag as such. But it is something that we have to spend a LOT of our time sorting through. If I have a nice Chamber of Commerce site which lists 20 business that are in a locality, you can bet I would MUCH rather list those, than try to filter my way through 20 potential mis-submitted sites in a category.
Sorry about the long ramble - but I wanted to give you a slice of the experience of being an ODP editor.
Here is the post I am thinking about regarding real estate
http://resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12576&highlight=estate
"Finally, real estate is one of the most abuse prone areas of the directory, and even the few editors who talk to submitters are loathe to talk to real estate companies/agents. So, we are capable of replying but choose not to."
I know the reply is in the context of replying to editor email, but I think a general attitude of editors can be gathered from the statement. I don't think he is referring to real estate as an oft mis-submitted set of categories, yet he seems to give the impression it is a spam heavy category. Ridden with abuse.
Using real estate as an example it would seem fair to say certain sites / agents could build a reputation as being spammy, not honest, "sneaky".... to the point when they submit the site gets left in queue for infinitum, because there are other more reputable / unknown sites to review.
http://resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12576&highlight=estate
"Finally, real estate is one of the most abuse prone areas of the directory, and even the few editors who talk to submitters are loathe to talk to real estate companies/agents. So, we are capable of replying but choose not to."
I know the reply is in the context of replying to editor email, but I think a general attitude of editors can be gathered from the statement. I don't think he is referring to real estate as an oft mis-submitted set of categories, yet he seems to give the impression it is a spam heavy category. Ridden with abuse.
Using real estate as an example it would seem fair to say certain sites / agents could build a reputation as being spammy, not honest, "sneaky".... to the point when they submit the site gets left in queue for infinitum, because there are other more reputable / unknown sites to review.
Reputation is the public perception of the history of your character. That's a fact of life, and the internet didn't change it. Sites, like corporations and other entities, have reputations also.
If there is a change in behavior, the reputation can (eventually) follow. But it must be publicly visible, and it must be relevant.
Very few sites actually get rejected for spamming. Most of them get rejected for not meeting our criterion of providing unique relevant content, and the submitter in frustration turns to aggressive submitting rather than aggressive content generation. That is, the rejection occurs or could have occurred before the spamming. So a change of ownership PROBABLY won't matter. A change of content MAY not matter, if the owner has a reputation for untrustworthy submittals. A change of ownership AND of content probably matters: such a thing, if brought to our attention, would warrant a fresh review of the site.
If there is a change in behavior, the reputation can (eventually) follow. But it must be publicly visible, and it must be relevant.
Very few sites actually get rejected for spamming. Most of them get rejected for not meeting our criterion of providing unique relevant content, and the submitter in frustration turns to aggressive submitting rather than aggressive content generation. That is, the rejection occurs or could have occurred before the spamming. So a change of ownership PROBABLY won't matter. A change of content MAY not matter, if the owner has a reputation for untrustworthy submittals. A change of ownership AND of content probably matters: such a thing, if brought to our attention, would warrant a fresh review of the site.
Again, I want it to be understood I am trying to get insite into general ODP methods and help us users get a better understanding of what to expect. That said, I feel I need to defend my site when it is questioned.
I trust you have looked at our site. I would hope so since you were able to comment on it, but nonetheless I will say why I think it is not a lead generation site.
"Show us the content, not promise content after someone sends you personal information."
1) We have a lot of content regarding insurance, how to buy it, what to expect.... That is served without ANY personal information coming to our site. We have two resource centers devoted to bringing life insurance, and health insurance content to the user.
2) We list several avenues for which to contact licensed agents (phone, email form, street address). These are listed on a prominetly place "contact us" page, and the address is on the footer of every page.
3) To attain an insurance quote we DO ask for personal information, but it is the bare minimum for which to generate a quote (and we don't get their name or email address). There is no way around gettting some information to generate a quote. Once the quote is generated the user is presented with multiple companies and their rates, all of which can be viewed in further detail revealing plan brochures from the carriers, and plan summaries. All very relevant content.
4) The only time we request personal information is when they choose to apply with a company and it is necessary to gather that information. We need it to send them an application, contact them as the insurance application goes through underwriting and correspond with them as the carrier updates us on their status. I don't see why that is bad, we cannot give applications to people unless they have an agent, it is the law in some places and carriers will not deal with the public, rather an agent who represents them. It is a matter of regulation.
I apologize for the lowdown on how our site works and our place in the industry, but it is the second time the site has been what I consider "misclassified" which leads me even further to believe no one has seen the site, it is only being judged on reputation or a more general stereotype.
To be more general and respond to Hutcheson, whom as I have read the forums have come to respect the opinions of greatly. If for example a site is reputed as being of ill ownership, and poor / no content how is that site to get the attention of the editors it has changed. I assume only a minimum of information about a site is shown in the "queue" when an editor is looking at unreviewed sites. The only way to see the entire submission would be to specifically look at the submission from the "summary page" that lists all sites awaiting review. If the site is recognized by name, there would be no way to get a veteran editor to see (perhaps comments made that the site has changed content and ownership in the description) the description because they dismiss it on name recognition. I would like to know if this can happen?
I trust you have looked at our site. I would hope so since you were able to comment on it, but nonetheless I will say why I think it is not a lead generation site.
"Show us the content, not promise content after someone sends you personal information."
1) We have a lot of content regarding insurance, how to buy it, what to expect.... That is served without ANY personal information coming to our site. We have two resource centers devoted to bringing life insurance, and health insurance content to the user.
2) We list several avenues for which to contact licensed agents (phone, email form, street address). These are listed on a prominetly place "contact us" page, and the address is on the footer of every page.
3) To attain an insurance quote we DO ask for personal information, but it is the bare minimum for which to generate a quote (and we don't get their name or email address). There is no way around gettting some information to generate a quote. Once the quote is generated the user is presented with multiple companies and their rates, all of which can be viewed in further detail revealing plan brochures from the carriers, and plan summaries. All very relevant content.
4) The only time we request personal information is when they choose to apply with a company and it is necessary to gather that information. We need it to send them an application, contact them as the insurance application goes through underwriting and correspond with them as the carrier updates us on their status. I don't see why that is bad, we cannot give applications to people unless they have an agent, it is the law in some places and carriers will not deal with the public, rather an agent who represents them. It is a matter of regulation.
I apologize for the lowdown on how our site works and our place in the industry, but it is the second time the site has been what I consider "misclassified" which leads me even further to believe no one has seen the site, it is only being judged on reputation or a more general stereotype.
To be more general and respond to Hutcheson, whom as I have read the forums have come to respect the opinions of greatly. If for example a site is reputed as being of ill ownership, and poor / no content how is that site to get the attention of the editors it has changed. I assume only a minimum of information about a site is shown in the "queue" when an editor is looking at unreviewed sites. The only way to see the entire submission would be to specifically look at the submission from the "summary page" that lists all sites awaiting review. If the site is recognized by name, there would be no way to get a veteran editor to see (perhaps comments made that the site has changed content and ownership in the description) the description because they dismiss it on name recognition. I would like to know if this can happen?