Possibly dropped from dmoz?

Hello,

Could you guys kindly checked what happened to my site [url removed] under the category weight loss?

It's been listed since 2000 under the same category now it's gone. If it was taken off for some specific reason, is there any way the site could be reinstated or other form of venue to address my issue?

Thanks for your time.

Site is not listable in its current form

The site was removed by concensus of several editors who felt that, once the affiliate content was removed, the remaining content did not meet the requirements for the ODP under its unique rich content criteria. We are not allowed to get into any further discussion on this forum about the specific reasons or reasoning of the editors.

For further details please see the ODP guidelines at http://dmoz.org/guidelines/

Thanks.

Thanks for the quick reply.

Alucard said:

once the affiliate content was removed, the remaining content did not meet the requirements for the ODP under its unique rich content criteria.

Click to expand...

Is there an appeal process for situation like this?

I mean, there are over 30,000 non-affiliated site listed in there...all pertaining to weight loss and an active forum for dieters with 1800 members+ which I have separated it to [specifics]but still accessable through checkweight.net

Surely, compared to other 'similar' type of site, [specific] is in fact the biggest and most comprehensive in its class?

I'm not trying to start an argument or asking for a better explanation why my site was picked 'among similar site' but is there a way I could appeal the decision?

If it is not appropriate to discuss this in a public forum, I could be reach at beenspammedthroughthisboard@nowherecom. I would really appreciate a constructive reply since this is really important to me.

Thanks again for the reply

No, there is no appeal process.


Editors review what is *on* the site. No other factors (like the opinion of the owner or designer, for example) are taken into consideration.

The ODP is building a directory of websites, and the content of the site is the only thing that can speak for a site.

The ODP is building a directory of websites, and the content of the site is the only thing that can speak for a site.

Click to expand...

Totally agree with you,

But it seems that there is a double standard on that category and perhaps conflict of interest as well, the way my site was picked.

For instance...

1. ADietDirectory - hardly any content and it's still listed.

2. Diet Central - a framed homestead site to 'Epinion.com', in essence this site has no content at all just a frame page but still listed.

3. Diet Links - hardly any listing and still listed.

4. Weight Directory - reasonable size but nothing close to the size of my database and is still listed.

So, in essence what's so unique with the 4 sites above that my site does not offer? Because, content wise, I believe I have more to offer.

Basically, that's it?

I'm okay with it 'if' such policies/rules/guidelines are 'applied consistently to each site' in that category.

However, I felt I've been put to disadvantage 'unfairly' when my competitors are listed and mine was delisted in the guise that 'my content is not rich or unique enough' while my competitors are considered unique.

Well, maybe there's no appeal process.

But, I won't go quietly either when I have worked this site for over 4 years building its database to where it's currently now. I honestly believe that most ODP editors are fair and honest. However, this problem is just plain wrong and something is not right.

If I have to go all the way to the top to discuss this problem, I will.

If I have to go all the way to the top to discuss this problem, I will.

Click to expand...

Feel free to do so, but not here, since at this point I think you have already been told We are not allowed to get into any further discussion on this forum

You might also wish to read Editorial Discretion in http://www.dmoz.org/add.html

I'm aware of the Guidelines and the Add policy but as you have said this is not the place to discuss this matter.

Just venting my frustration but will follow-up through at the proper venue.

Appreciate the help folks.

And just so you know - the proper venue is staff@dmoz.org - that is the "top" of the ODP. If you want to go higher than that you will need to be in touch with managers at Time Warner/AOL.

Unfortunately, we cannot take into account the "other sites are doing it, so why can't we" argument.

As the directory has grown, the standards for new entries have been raised too. There are plenty of already-listed sites, that if submitted today would be instantly deleted from the queue. It may be that a site was added when standards were lower. It may be that the site has altered its content since it was listed, and should no longer qualify. If the site should no longer be there, then sooner or later someone will notice that and will re-review some, a few, or all of the sites in the category. At that time, the lowest quality stuff will be culled.

So, we can't add stuff to a category based on the lowest quality element of what is already there. We should only be adding sites that *add* to the quality of the category: in other words, that some new site is better than the best site that is already there. Yes! That is right: it should be "better than the best already listed site", not "just good enough to be the second worse site in the category".

Maybe that goes somewhat towards explaining the process involved. For a wider roundup of the issues read the last 100 posts by Hutcheson for example.