red-flagged

Hello Forum,

It was recently brought to my attention that an editor had red-flagged one of my websites due to being a "Mirror" site. In fact the website submitted is not a mirror website. It holds separate content all together than my other website. The 2 websites in question: www.1listingservice.com (already listed) and www.southeastern-homes.com (trying to get listed).
1ListingService.com is a database with ONLY real estate. www.southeastern-homes.com holds 360 virtual tours and ONLY vacation rentals.
I do own both websites, and therefore they are linked together. However, they run separate from each other.
1Listingservice.com was originally mistitled: SoutheasternHomes.com...which is actually not even the proper website name for Southeastern-Homes.com, but more-so, it is not the name of the website listed. I did send in an update form, and while that update has not taken place on google, it has been changed on dmoz.com
I do feel like due to this mistitle, I have been red-flagged.
My question: Do I need to take it up with the editor that red-flagged the submission?
If so, how do I do so. I actually did find out who red-flagged it, but have not received an email link for the editor.
Any help would be great.
Regards,

The title change appears to be a mistake that was subsequently corrected.

Talk to Google about their site being out of date, it's not under our control.

Editors are advised to avoid getting into discussions with submitters, especially about topics such as this.

I avoid editing real estate because of this kind of multiple submission activity, so I can't possibly edit or change your listing. I see two sites with word for word copies of paragraphs. Sure looks like a mirror to me.

And that should be the end of the discussion - I've already said too much.

To quote from this forums 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

Oh - one last thing - before you consider resubmitting your site.

http://www.dmoz.org/add.html quote:
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. Multiple submissions of the same or related sites may result in the exclusion and/or deletion of those and all affiliated sites.

First. Thank you very much for your reply

With all due respect, using the same criteria for keyword optimization may very well have made my paragraphs similar, but similar paragraphs does not equal mirror! I have studied hard to know what various engines are looking for, and what they are not looking for. This recipe I use for having the correct amount of keywords without going over the proper amount of keywords, has absolutely made the paragraphs similar. However, The keywords themselves are different. The links are different. The pages on the other end of those links are different. The names of the websites are not even remotely similar, and they are not on the same server. Not even the same state! They only link together and are owned by the same owner. For that I should not be punished or discriminated against.
This is a mistake by the editor, and I am hearing that if I speak out too loud that all my websites will be banned.
Meanwhile, southeastern-homes.com contains more vacation rentals (over 200 currently with 150 more being added within weeks) than all the other websites in that category combined! It looks like at some point it would be for the public good to add such a website.
ps. I know that google is a separate entity. I just was using in reference.
Any advise or help with this issue would be greatly appreciated.
Regards,

One of the problems webmasters have [and I include myself among them] is that we are trying all kinds of tricks to promote ourselves in search engines [mostly Google] - using techniques that actually have no logical use to the end user.

That includes creating multliple web sites with slightly different content in order to optimize one web site for one set of words, and another web site for another set of words. Or creating different pages, or sites to target different sets of customers that might be searching useing different sets of words. This is part of the game, and as long as you don't end up spamming Google, then it's the survival of the trickiest.

But in effect you are spreading content over multiple domains.

And from the ODP point of view, this is not ok, [from a simplified point of view] you get one listing, no matter how many domains. [There sometimes are exceptions, but they don;t apply here]

As far as one of your sites being better to be listed [as the single site you are going to be allowed] - I don't know, I did not spend time doing a detailed analysis.

I looked again.

http://www.1listingservice.com/ has a link to vacation rentals - which goes to http://southeastern-homes.com/rentals/maggievalleyvacationrentals.shtml

So that means we consider southeastern-homes as being a subset of 1listing - and from that point of view the correct site is listed.

BTW http://www.1listingservice.com/ contact us ==> 404 Object Not Found

The reason my website was red-flagged was due to being a mirror website. DMOZ definition of a mirror website is as follows: Mirror sites are sites that contain identical content, but have altogether different URLs

I can understand and appreciate that definition, and we are not trying to figure out "what the definition of is is". That definition is pretty clear.
My websites are not the same. One has real estate. One has vacation rentals. Just that fact alone should take both websites out of the label of "mirror". They have different content. That is not identical!
Yes, I understand the game we all play as webmasters, but the fact that no real estate is present on the vacation rental website, and no vacation rentals are present on the real estate website should be clear to all webmasters, no matter how good you are at playing the game.

Real estate guidelines are tougher than other areas.

Read http://dmoz.org/realestateguidelines.html - noting these points

exact mirrors vs. virtual mirrors

As described below, the convention is to list agent/agency sites only once in the Directory.

So if as you say, you split your content into two sites that have different content, you still only get one site listed.

Bobrat...You are clearly an intelligent being and a wealth of information. I will accept any advise you have in what I need to do to get both websites listed.
If you see that as impossible, I would like to look into removing 1listingservice.com from the directory and having southeastern-homes.com added instead...except in the correct category.
My advertising is around southeastern-homes.com, not 1listingservice.com.

Advertise how you want, 1listingservice.com is listed. southeastern-homes.com will not be listed.

ishtar said:

Advertise how you want, 1listingservice.com is listed. southeastern-homes.com will not be listed.

Click to expand...

I think that may be overkill a little bit.. don't you?

According to your statement; there is not a chance of me getting 1listingservice.com taken from the directory with the intensions of getting southeastern-homes.com listed.
Also; There is not a chance of getting both websites listed..even if they are no longer linked together, or no longer owned by the same owner.
Is this the official position of dmoz.com / or overkill by ishtar ?

I seriously doubt if both site will ever be listable according to the dMoz guidelines, no matter how much you change.

Are you saying that even if the two websites were not linked together at all, and if one website was under ownership of someone else, they would still not be listable?

Again I ask if this is the position of dmoz.com and all the fine volunteers associated with it, or is this overkill by ishtar?

It is a bit discouraging actually seeing that a decision has all but been made about the future listing status of my website, no matter the changes made.
It just seems like it would be a much better practice to try and help webmasters understand how to make their websites more eligible (much like bobrat was doing) rather than discourage any effort in making it more acceptable.
What do I know though. It also appears to me that sooner or later the customer would become aware of the fact that when they are looking at the top 10 search results in an engine like google, they are not actually looking at the true top 10 websites for that search term. They only get the top 10 results of those websites added to the directory by a handful (at best) of volunteers. One would think that enough disgruntled webmasters would make a difference...but then maybe not.
I think the same standards should be held true for ALL websites!

Example?...Glad you asked.
Paypal.com: listed in 4 areas of dmoz.com as evident here:
http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=paypal.com

Ebay.com: listed no less than 43 times as evident here:
http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=ebay.com

Both websites owned by the same company. Both websites being listed multiple times for the very reasons that I am not allowed to have even 2 listings. Please don't tell me it is because of the special rules set forth for potential real estate listings. Ebay sells real estate also, so they have the same rules.
If I were to get the same benefits that Ebay gets, I could actually get my website listed in real estate, vacation rentals, travel, hotels, fishing, skiing..etc.

I am not trying to pull any tricks here, and I am not looking for advantages over any other webmaster. I am simply trying to keep my customers happy by keeping their listings visible in all search engines. In an attempt to keep my vacation rentals separate from the real estate, two websites were designed. I assure you it wasn't to try and be sneaky with dmoz.com volunteers. One of the websites is a database, the other is a directory. The listings appear completely different. The true content of each website couldn't be more different.

One last question: Once a website has been red-flagged and considered "mirror", how long does it stay that way?

Please read our FAQ
Why won't you get into a discussion about why you won't list my site?

But...

The info re eBay was intersting from a QC point of view. I hope an interested party or two might want to look into that.

Re so-called "red flagging" of sites, it's a completely internal matter, it shouldn't have been discussed so much here. Let me just assure you that a red-flag doesn't necessarily mean a site will never get listed. Editors always use their discretion ...which makes the rest of your questions moot. Hence the reply above. That link succinclty sums up the situation I think.

pvgool is right. We do not discuss the listing or non-listing of any one specific web site. bobrat and others have given you general advice, but we won't get into an argument about the decision not to list southeastern-homes.

A web site and its URL are not necessarily permanent entities. If a site changes contents completely it may need to be listed in another category, or removed. A previously unlistable URL can become listable if connected to different content. These are general and obvious points.

When it comes to editor notes with or without colour, those serve as communication channels between editors. Like all other internal communication, they are not intended for public discussion, as clarified in http://dmoz.org/guidelines/communication.html .

zjoker, you're focusing on the wrong part of the guidelines. What you should be concerned about is the submittal policies, and avoiding what they say will happen to your sites if you do what you did with your sites.

Thanks to all who have replied. I do understand your rules in what you can and can't say here.

pvgool::: Thanks for that link. That backs up my point on the "position of dmoz" or "personal opinion overkill". I just wanted the guy to say that it was totally his opinion, and he could be wrong on assuming the listing status of my website will never change.

jrwright::: thanks for seeing things clearly. Please notice that I used the term "red-flagged". I am not sure an editor used the term, but I could be wrong. My goal is not to get anyone in trouble for internal terms being used, so I certainly hope that does not happen. Bobrat was excellent on hearing my position and not viewing it as arguing or whining.

nea:::

nea said:

bobrat and others have given you general advice, but we won't get into an argument about the decision not to list southeastern-homes.

Click to expand...

You are correct on many points. Please know that my goal here is certainly not to get into an argument.
You also said:

nea said:

A web site and its URL are not necessarily permanent entities.

Click to expand...

This is also my point, and my hopes! One would hope that if I sold you a car, you would not be rejected at the tag office just because the car was once owned by me

hutcheson::: I am not sure I understand your post, but I feel as though I am focusing on exactly the right part. Up to this point in this thread, noone has been able to explain why Ebay/Paypal is getting listing rules more liberal than my listing rules...however, I am confident that if there are good reasons they will be posted. If it is something that needs to be looked into, that will also be explained.

Now knowing that changes to the website CAN alter the listing status of the domain, how does one go about making these changes known to the editor that originally rejected the request? Or do these changes simply need to be pointed out here on the forum?

regards,

Now knowing that changes to the website CAN alter the listing status of the domain, how does one go about making these changes known to the editor that originally rejected the request? Or do these changes simply need to be pointed out here on the forum?

Click to expand...

Neither - if and when you have made those changes, simply resubmit the site, and point out in the description that you have altered the contents of the web site significantly. (You will have to change it very significantly, however; in our book the sites are still the same thing.)

However, what Hutcheson says is true. You have been submitting a type of site that is explicitly not listable according to our guidelines, and if you persist in doing so you may eventually jeopardise the listing you do have.

Up to this point in this thread, noone has been able to explain why Ebay/Paypal is getting listing rules more liberal than my listing rules...however, I am confident that if there are good reasons they will be posted. If it is something that needs to be looked into, that will also be explained.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but comparing other companies to your company is just what we don't do in forum discussions. And yes, if the situation needs adjusting it will be looked into; pointing it out here ensures that at least half a dozen editors will take a look!

Which takes me back to an earlier question.
If you insist on seeing my 2 separate websites [that are not similar in name, content, states in which they reside, accounts in which the money is deposited, personnel which runs the offices, and listings in which are accepted], and only are willing to list 1 of the sites, due to being owned [but not managed] by the same person, why can I not request 1listingservice.com be removed from the directory so that southeastern-homes.com can be listed? I am not officially requesting this..only requesting an answer to the question.

Another note::: I am not comparing my company with other companies. It is your rules that you agreed to adhere to when listing domains. Are these rules setout for me and the other small businesses in the world, or are these rules setout for every site?
The whole concept of dmoz.org was put into play for ALL websites to be able to be competitive no matter the cash flow...otherwise it would be just another pay-per-click engine. The accuracy of dmoz.org is achieved by more than just editors and metas, it is achieved in part by webmasters such as myself pointing out obvious oversights and discrepancies. Many times that is overlooked and under- appreciated. Instead what we receive at times are sly comments by editors on a power trip.

I understand all the rules. I understand how time has sculpted the rules in the form they are now in. I understand that the system has been played by many webmasters, and I am sure there have been plenty of editors fall through the cracks that were only looking to get their websites listed. All in a while sometimes you just may have a legit webmaster with multiple websites that deserves to have both listed.
Isn't it being taken too far now? The rules for real estate was really made so that realtors couldn't list their websites in all the areas that they cover. To prevent them from listing under every single town in their county. I am not trying to pull anything like that. I have real estate, I have vacation rentals. They are on different websites. I am not sure how that can be viewed as the same.
Paypal and Ebay::: Paypal and Ebay SHOULD be listed separately...they do however reside in separate buildings, in separate states, with separate personnel, and separate logos. Their problem (much like mine) is that they are linked together on every page, and they announced to the world that they are the same company. You search for your item, you buy it with paypal, you have the option to go back to the home page of ebay.
In my site you have the option of real estate or rentals. You go to the proper website to visit the listing, and you have the option of going back to the home page.
I question how deep my website has been viewed if it is being viewed as mirror!

Overall, you guys have been great to hear me out in this thread. Maybe it will help improve the system in the future. One could only hope!

What do I know though..I was rejected as editor.
Funny note: I was editor for 2 local newspapers for a total of 22 years.
Regards,

why can I not request 1listingservice.com be removed from the directory so that southeastern-homes.com can be listed?

Click to expand...

We list the site that we feel is most appropriate, which may not necessarily be the one that the site owner wants listed most.

And I would advise you to drop the whole eBay/Paypal thing -- you've already been told it will be looked into and harping on it isn't helping.

Funny note: I was editor for 2 local newspapers for a total of 22 years.

Click to expand...

Newspaper editing and ODP editing are not the same thing and thus experience in one doesn't make one automatically suitable for the other.