Site rejected due to affiliate link. What to do?

Hello, I've had my site, Auto Insurance In-Depth rejected twice because of affiliate links in the site.

With almost 100 pages of unique, extremely useful informational content, the site seems like an excellent candidate for inclusion. And yet the fact that it contains affiliate links was a no-no to the editor.

Many sites have affiliate links. Cnn does, and they have 100+ listings in Odp, as do many other major sites that rely wholly or in part on affiliate/advertising income.

Our site is clean, loads fast, and is relatively clutter-free. It is also very useful to those who seek lower rates on their auto insurance.

Why does it continue to be excluded, and what can I do to change the situation?

So long as the main purpose of the site continues to be to drive viewers to other commercial sites, it is unlikely that an editor will think the main purpose of the site is not to drive viewers to other commercial sites.

The guidelines explicitly forbid listing such sites.

Asides:
-- CNN's main purpose is arguably to present news to people, and their situation is not strictly comparable.

-- Based on my background as a generator of HTML pages from databases, I would not have described the site's unique content as "100 pages", but as "rather less than half of that behind." Or, to emphasize the user-interface aspect, "several treasures have been hidden in 100 rooms full of twisty little passages."

So far as what to do: I do not believe the site can be made into a site listable by ODP rules -- it would be easier to start from scratch. And you need to be focusing on website promotion venues that (unlike ODP) accept paid commercial advertisements.

Hutcheson, I appreciate your criticism. You certainly make valid points, do so diplomatically.

However I take issue with two of your statements:

-- Based on my background as a generator of HTML pages from databases, I would not have described the site's unique content as "100 pages", but as "rather less than half of that behind." Or, to emphasize the user-interface aspect, "several treasures have been hidden in 100 rooms full of twisty little passages."

Click to expand...

Designing an interface that allows someone to see all 100 pages with one click is next to impossible, and yet we've almost done this. Also, when you state that "there are less than half of 100 original pages" this is simply not true. Although many pages are similar (the state-law pages, for anyone who ares to look) the content within them is all unique to that page, within reason.

CNN's main purpose is arguably to present news to people, and their situation is not strictly comparable.

Click to expand...

Of course, that could be a valid position. However, Cnn is a business, and it's business model relies on advertising. As do we.

But let's leave cnn out of it. What about all the other sites sites like ours that are in the directory, that have arguably less content than our site, and also rely on advertising to make money? Why do they get to be in the directory and we don't?

It's simple: there is a bias among people outside of the affiliate business against affiliates. I've been doing this for a really long time, so I ought to know.

It may seem low-brow, or down-market, or what have you. Fine.

But so is Lower-my-bills.com (a direct competitor of ours). They get multiple listings in Dmoz because their business appears to be original somehow, when it's not. There are thousands of other examples.

I certainly appreciate editor's desire to keep the directory free or repetition, which listing affiliate sites of leads to. But, again, mentally block the affiliate links on the site, and just look at the content! If it stands up to scrutiny, as I believe our site does, then it should be allowed in.

Hutcheson also suggested:

And you need to be focusing on website promotion venues that (unlike ODP) accept paid commercial advertisements.

Click to expand...

Of course we are doing that too. But as many people know, getting high positions in Google is the name of the game. And to do so, you really need an ODP link. Therefore, when we are being denied a listing in the directory, we are actually being denied a high ranking in Google. This is something that I cannot ignore.

My company is developing 11 different services along the lines of the one mentioned in this thread. They are all unique sites, which deal with different subjects. It has taken us almost two years to research and write the content.

Now, I am risking losing valuable traffic because of a bias on the part of editors who do not understand the affiliate's point of view.

&lt; /end meandering rant <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> &gt;

I can tell you that the statement &gt;&gt; Therefore, when we are being denied a listing in the directory, we are actually being denied a high ranking in Google. &lt;&lt; is totally false and untrue. An ODP listing _helps_ but it is NOT the "be all and end all". And, as an ODP editor, we do not care if Google lists your site because we do or decided to exclude it. All we care about is the content on http://dmoz.org/ .

The ODP guideline on affiliate sites is strict for a reason - otherwise practically every category would be crammed full of the same "site" with just different branding (as that is practically what you are doing - just 'rebranding' someone elses services). We are not "picking" on your site because it has an affiliate link (as, as you say, that would exclude the majority of sites) because we are excluding it as it falls foul of our guidelines

Sites consisting primarily of affiliate links, or whose sole purpose is to drive user traffic to another site for the purpose of commission sales, provide no unique content and are not appropriate for inclusion in the directory.

Click to expand...

.

Basically, the guidelines were designed and discussed by ODP staff and senior editors and we have decided that we don't want "sites...whose sole purpose is to drive user traffic to another site for the purpose of commission sales" to be listed in the directory. Editors have looked at your site and found that that is the prime purpose of your site (to drive traffic to Insweb), therefore it is not suitable for listing.

If, however, you find sites in the directory that you feel have the prime purpose of driving visitors to other affiliate services - let us know and we'll review them and probably remove them. The guidelines have evolved over time and many sites have been "grandfathered in" but that doesn't mean we can't remove them.

Beebware, I understand that editors don't care about dmoz listings affecting Google rankings. Why should they? But it is a fact of life.

as that is practically what you are doing - just 'rebranding' someone elses services

Click to expand...

Again, look at my site. I am not rebranding anything. All original, useful, information content. The fact that I try to tell people how to best use another company's service, and then send them to that company's site could only be described as a plus.

Our site has only been online for a few months. But we've already received several email detailing how we've helped our visitors save real money on their insurance rates. Dmoz visitors (and those clicking on links in the RDF dump) are being denied this service. It just doesn't make sense.

What to do

Gaetano,

Personally I feel your site does have significant and useful content. One change you might undertake to reduce its "affiliate" perception is move the InsWeb ad to the bottom of each page. If you favor your informational content, perhaps the category editor would do so as well.

Of course, I can't guarantee this change would get the site accepted. Nor can I guarantee that InsWeb would continue their relationship with you should you de-emphasize their ads. Should the latter be an actual concern, you may wish to review your "I'm not an affiliate!" stance.

&gt;I can tell you that the statement &gt;&gt; Therefore, when we are being denied a listing in the directory, we are actually being denied a high ranking in Google. &lt;&lt; is totally false and untrue. An ODP listing _helps_ but it is NOT the "be all and end all". And, as an ODP editor, we do not care if Google lists your site because we do or decided to exclude it. All we care about is the content on http://dmoz.org/ .

Can we put this on the home page of this site and http://dmoz.org? <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> We really need to put this myth to an end. I happen to be a regular poster in the search engine forums at Webmasterworld. One of the regulars in the Google forum is Googleguy, a Google programmer. Googleguy himself has stated that ODP links are treated no different than links on any other page on the web. The Google PageRank of most ODP cats isn't very high, and these cats often list a lot of sites, which dilutes PageRank even more. The upshot of this is that I know teenagers with home pages where a link would be *more* valuable than one at the ODP, because these teenagers' pages have a higher PageRank than most ODP cats! Even more so because you could get that teenager to use whatever keyword stuffed anchor text you wanted to optimize for search terms you wish to score high for.

Put simply, if you want to do well in Google (and most other search engines), then *don't* worry much about the ODP. This is especially true because with the queues being so backlogged in most of the ODP, even if your site does get listed it may take 1-2 years after you submit to the ODP to get listed. Rather than worry about the ODP, if you want to do well in search engines, see if you have a cousin Kim with a home page with decent Google PageRank and get her to link to you. The big advantage here is that you can probably get that link from cousin Kim in a couple days, where at the ODP it may take a couple years to get listed. This will get you search engine rank improvements within a month or 2. Or, try to get links from other webmasters with sites on the same topic as yours.

I know this is true from my own experience. My 2 websites (non-commercial) do *exceedingly* well on the search terms I have optimized for at Google, while the other notable sites on the same topic as mine for most key search terms are doing far worse. In many cases, these sites are so buried in the Google SERPs they are practically unfindable. ALL of these notable sites on the same topic as mine are listed in the *same* ODP category as mine. If ODP listings were that important, these sites would be at the top of the heap along with me on Google, rather than buried. The reason my sites do so well is because I realized that the ODP listing wasn't very important, and thus *did the other things* that it takes to do well at Google to get to the top. Most notably, get a number of other sites to link to mine, and also get high keyword density for the search terms I was aiming for.

Put simply, any webmaster who thinks getting listed in the ODP will rocket them to the top of search engines is living in a dream world. If you want to come up well in search engines, quit worrying about the ODP and learn something about search engine optimization.

A lot of weight to PageRank appears to be given by Google to being listed in the ODP.

I have found one site with just 4 pages and the backward links listed by Google are just 3, one being ODP/DMOZ, one being Google's ODP link, and one being another web site, and these 3 backward links and 4 pages with very little text have a page rank of 4

I have a web site with 20 pages, which Googles gives a page rank of 5, and lists 134 backward links, but the site has not been listed yet in ODP as I gather it is waiting for an editor to review it. This means I have spent a lot more time and effort finding sites with link pages which
rank 4 or better, but this has far less accumulative effect on page rank than just one link does from ODP

So an ODP listing is very important in Google's ranking system.

The ODP has nothing to do with and no concern for how or whether sites get good pageranks from Google. You will have to consult one of the SEO/webmaster boards to learn more about such issues. The ODP editors are only concerned with building the ODP directory. Also, no one ever said an ODP listing didn't help, but you cannot put all of your eggs in one basket. There are plenty of great ways to increase your pagerank and search engine standings if you are just willing to go out and learn.

Best of luck to you.

Right. ODP editors don't consider Google PR when editing. And as for that site with an ODP link and a Google PR of 4, I've seen teenagers with home pages that had a PR of 6 that had no ODP links at all. A Google PR of 4 is just mediocre, nothing more.

&gt;Put simply, any webmaster who thinks getting listed in the ODP will rocket them to the top of search engines is living in a dream world.

rfgdxm,

The last few days I've spent many hours reading reports on DMOZ, both in Webmasterworld and in here.

Considering the extent of the problems, as presented in the posts I've read sofar, I would certainly HOPE that what you state above is so. But I'm afraid it's just not the case (in general).

I have just checked the top-ranking sites in a category I'm examining closely lately, through Google, and e.g. the #3 one I'm looking at right now has just 13 links pointing to it, of which 4 are ODP mirrors (Google's own dir, www.excite.co.uk etc). On the contrary, another site of the same scope which has over 100 links pointing to it, but (suprise) isn't listed in ODP, doesn't even make it in the top-50 of Google.

And this is what makes the whole situation with ODP so very problematic imho, allowing some editors to adopt a 'holier than thou' attitude towards people who may (and in some cases do) have ten times the academic, professional and social credentials (there is a ancient greek phrase that exactly describes this, but I've no translation handy).

Had it been otherwise, I guess that almost every submitter to ODP (who respects himself and his time) would happily go on with life and forget about it. Instead I see people practically beg to get listed, become editors (it's beyond me why a really knowledgeable person would want to keep reapplying for an editor position, after being turned down once), resolve cases of blatant abuse etc

Regards, Dimitris

Personally, I know a number of sites that are in competitve markets which have extremely high (if not number 1) positions in Google for their chosen keywords: yet, do not have ANY ODP links at all.

There's a lot more to SEO than just getting listed in the ODP, and I think you'll find that Google does recognise "ODP data" on other sites and doesn't apply the higher page rank to the listings (I'm sure there's a reference somewhere, but it's 2am atm and hence I'm loath to look for it).

As an SEO, I recently submitted a clients site to ODP. I have not touched it as an editor (and probably never will as it's not in my "field") - and it is not currently listed in the ODP. However, I ran a report for the client today and they had over 100 number 1 positions for their dozen keywords on 35 search engines: all down to standard optimisation techniques, no spamming, good SEO practice and knowledge and good overall submissions. An ODP listing *is NOT* essential for good results!