Site dropped :: How can I get relisted again?

Greetings.

I would be most appreciative of some help and advice.

My website, Respree.com, has been listed with DMOZ for the past four years.

I've just noticed my DMOZ listing no longer exists.

Upon investigation, it appears DMOZ has recently changed (reorganized) the category I was previously listed in, which in turn, has resulted in a change in the URL.

I was previously listed at:
Shopping > Visual Arts > Posters
http://dmoz.org/Shopping/Visual_Arts/Posters/

The URL above no longer exists.

It appears the new replacement category is at:
Shopping > Visual Arts > Posters and Prints
http://dmoz.org/Shopping/Visual_Arts/Posters_and_Prints/

However, it looks like my site was delisted for an unknown reason during this reorganization. I would like to understand the reasons for this and what I can do to correct the situation.

I run a clean shopping site and really don't have anything either the editors or visitors could find objectionable (i.e. no duplicate DMOZ listings, trapping visitors, wrong DMOZ category, am not an affiliate, etc.).

All comments and suggestions are welcome.

Thank you very much.

You should have posted this in the site status forum, where you would have been told that the site will no longer be listed in ODP, as it violates the listing requirements.

http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#notinclude

You are correct, your site was delisted on a review by an editor as part of the reorg.

We do not list sites of this type in the ODP - either it was originally listed in error, or the site's contents have changed since it was listed.

We are not allowed to go into details on this forum, but for possible reasons, please see http://dmoz.org/guidelines/

Thanks.

My apologies if my post was in the wrong category (it's my first post).

I have read through the guidelines thoroughly and do not see where my site has remotely come close breaking any of the guidelines.

Can you share specifically what was found objectionable?

Thank you.

Sorry but we do not go into specifics. Rest assured that the decision has been reviewed by other editors who have came to the same conclusion. Not listable.

Just to add. Just because we choose to not list your type of site does not make it a bad site or objectionable. There are many other avenues out there that would welcome a site such as yours. Possibly a pay per click campaign or a strong link exchange program with other sites. We choose not to list the site because it does not qualify according to our guidelines. This is in no way shape or form a statement that your site is bad. Just that we will not list it.

Thank you for your comments.

It seems pretty clear to all who have responded and I do respect your stance if it against the rules to go into specifics on why I was delisted.

Perhaps I can try to rephrase the question in another way.

Please note I am not try to be combative, but would simply like to understand the DMOZ point of view?

Here are three sites that are currently listed after the restructure in the category I seek to get listed in. Their business model, website structure and product offerings are virtually identical in every way to mine. What makes these site different from mine?

http://www.allposters.com/
http://www.globalgallery.net/
http://www.urbanposters.com/

Any insight would be appreciated.

We will look into those sites. Thanks for the heads-up.

Thank you Alucard.

I was only listing those as an example. The point I was actually trying to make is virtually every one of the sites listed in this category is like that. This is the reason I am having a tough time trying to figure out why I was singled out. All of us in this category are all online retailers offering prints and posters. If DMOZ eliminated all sites similar to mine, the category would be virtually empty.

What can I do to change my site so that it will qualify to be listed again?

I'm afraid, I'm still not seeing the problem, which is making it difficult to work toward a solution.

What is the reason behind not being able to go into the specifics of why a site was de-listed? I can't seem to figure out where this site breaks guideline and so I am intrigued... what did I miss?

All of the editors seem to be coming to the same conclusion; very quickly I might add -- "the site does not qualify." You're missing the same thing I'm missing -- "why?"

Very confused.

For example http://www.allposters.com/ is allowed - it offers a unique service. Tens of thousands of sites whose main purpose is to send business to allposters.com do not offer a unique service.

The same applies to cafepress, SMC etc.etc.

It's not forbidden to have linkks to these on a web site, if the web site without these links offers something of value.

My guess is they are indicating that your site is an affiliate site, or collection of products/links to other websites that actually sell the goods listed.

From my view, your site provides the goods, and the checkout process does not forward the user to any 3rd party, so I'm not sure if this is the exact reason why your site was removed from the index.

Do you sell the goods yourself or are they all products provided by another online store and you re-sell for them?

Thank you for your post. Being in the industry, I am aware of the thousands of allposters affiliates on the Net and completely agree with DMOZs' desire not to allow them in. I understand the duplication factor very clearly.

My site, however, is not an affiliate site and is no different than allposters.

I'm not sure if the inference here is that I am an affiliate of somekind. This is simply not true. There are more than 125,000 pages on my site. Not one of those pages contains a single external link to website who does product fullfillment. I neither receive nor pay a commission of any kind for the product sales on my site. Like all retailers, my profit is the difference between what I sell and buy products for.

In many ways, my site is more comprehensive than allposters. I offer my visitors free art resources resources, art articles, art news, links to quality art-related sites, biographies of artists, selected highlights of the famous pieces in art history, museum listings, just to name some of them. In short, they experience a quality, informationally rich visit to my site, in additional to being able to purchase products, if they wish.

While I do carry products that are similar to allposters, our product is mix is distinctly different in terms of the images we offer. I might add that most of the sites currently listed also carry products that are similar to allposters.

Please help me to understand the reasons I fail to see when all the other editors seem to be seeing it very clearly.

Thanks again.

Decius said:

From my view, your site provides the goods, and the checkout process does not forward the user to any 3rd party, so I'm not sure if this is the exact reason why your site was removed from the index.

Do you sell the goods yourself or are they all products provided by another online store and you re-sell for them?

Click to expand...

You are correct. From the start to the finish (order completion) you remain on my site. I sell goods directly to the consumer, collect proceeds from those sales, and ship product to customers.

Please note that although I am an editor, I'm asking this question merely as another user, since I don't work in the section of the directory your site was delisted from and don't know the details of your case.

But are the goods you are selling unique to your site? From the point of view of the directory, when identical wares are being sold by multiple sites, it's not really a benefit to the users to list them all. In fact, as someone who uses the ODP categories regularly while online shopping, I strongly prefer to see new items for sale *every* time I go to the trouble of opening a new window. If your business is reselling goods that are also offered from the manufacturer's site, then that may be a very valuable site to some searchers, but not necessarily to users of a directory.

flicker said:

But are the goods you are selling unique to your site? From the point of view of the directory, when identical wares are being sold by multiple sites, it's not really a benefit to the users to list them all. In fact, as someone who uses the ODP categories regularly while online shopping, I strongly prefer to see new items for sale *every* time I go to the trouble of opening a new window. If your business is reselling goods that are also offered from the manufacturer's site, then that may be a very valuable site to some searchers, but not necessarily to users of a directory.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your comment. I do understand the point you are getting at.

I will answer the question this way. No, the products we are offering are not unique. We have a mix of products which comes from more than 100 different sources or suppliers. It is the 'mix' of products which makes any given store unique from either a user or directory point of view. By way of illustration, you can find Coca-Cola, for example, in your local supermarket, Walmart, neighborhood convenience store, at a restaurant, movie theater, etc. However, all these sales outlets are very different, even though they have the 'same wares' so to speak. Does Coca-Cola grant exclusive distribution rights to any one customer? Of course, the answer is no.

I will make this generalized statement. Every product being sold on the Internet in an E-tailing environment came from a manufacturer. The chances of any one particular manufacturing granting the 'exclusive' distribution rights to any one particular E-tailer is virtually zero. It would be an extremely unwise business practice to place that much risk and reliance on any one sales (retail) outlet.

In our case, we not offer goods that are available for sale at a manufacturer's site, at least not in the context you might be thinking of. A manufacturer markets its products to E-tailers like myself. They sell to us at wholesale. I am marketing my products to the retail end user. It is not a fair comparison to equate product offered by a retailer versus those same products offered by a manufacturer. They are two completely different markets and audiences.

I personally do not think your site falls into the "Affiliates" category, and hence does not violate the ODP guidelines.

However, the problem that may now arise is the possibility that the editor(s) in question do not feel your site provides "unique" content to the category at hand. Regardless of your competitors, it is the discretion of the editor to decide whether your site contributes new and unique content to the category, and in this light you may be out of luck.

If you do indeed sell things that can be found everywhere else in the same category, perhaps the editor feels it is not necessary to add your site to it.

I personally do not think this is fair as it becomes a "first come first serve" type of deal, but they are the guidelines and this may be where you some up short.

A "possible" way to appeal this is to prove that your site offers enough unique content not found anywhere else in the same category, thereby placing unique value on what you have to offer. I do not know if this will suffice however, and it is just a suggestion.

I appreciate your comments and suggestions, Decius.

I do strongly feel my site has informationally rich content that cannot be found on competing sites with similar products. Can anyone suggest a way to properly present my case to the appropriate editor?

>Every product being sold on the Internet in an E-tailing environment came from a manufacturer. The chances of any one particular manufacturing
>granting the 'exclusive' distribution rights to any one particular E-tailer is virtually zero.

Well, that's not completely true, now is it? A lot of people make their own goods and sell them online, themselves. I buy from such mom-and-pop stores all the time.

Anyway, if none of your products are unique to your site, then for the "unique content" criteria, you're relying upon your selection and presentation of the products. That's a difficult position to be in IMHO. You'd probably have to be offering a really special service for the site to qualify. For example, if a clothing site advertised all non-allergenic products and had selected out the few non-allergenic products offered by each of 25 different sellers, I could see how that selection and presentation might be very helpful to people with skin allergies. If a clothing site just offered the same clumps of clothes that a hundred other stores do, it would be hard for it to really call itself unique content-wise.

That doesn't mean it can't be a great and successful site... but if I were you I'd focus on search engines, not directories. I think people looking for products via search engines might be more interested in finding a good general-store to buy known products from than users of a directory.

That's just my personal opinion, though, so make of it what you will. (-: