S
Starseed
Could I please get a status report on http://www.candybardesigns.com? I would like to know whether or not it has been accepted or would be likely to be accepted so I know if I need to work on it some more. Thanks.
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
Your site is a Cherubs-N-Chocolate affiliate, and as such is not listable under ODP guidelines.
If you have any questions, please see the ODP submission guidelines at: http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#affiliate
[Edited URL to avoid confusion]
Your site is a Cherubs-N-Chocolate affiliate, and as such is not listable under ODP guidelines.
If you have any questions, please see the ODP submission guidelines at: http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#affiliate
[Edited URL to avoid confusion]
D
dracus
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
Will probably have more luck without the :8080
http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#affiliate <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
Will probably have more luck without the :8080
http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#affiliate <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
I posted a reply before, but either it was deemed inappropriate, or it did not go through. Hopefully if I reword it I will have better luck. My question is this...
Does selling products you have purchased from a manufacturer, on your own unique site, qualify as being an affiliate? If you are not getting a commision, but are reselling them?
I posted a reply before, but either it was deemed inappropriate, or it did not go through. Hopefully if I reword it I will have better luck. My question is this...
Does selling products you have purchased from a manufacturer, on your own unique site, qualify as being an affiliate? If you are not getting a commision, but are reselling them?
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
I doubt your reply was deemed inappropriate, but I have noticed that some people have been having problems with posts getting through.
To answer your question: it does if it is part of a MLM scheme. In those cases (like Amway and Cherubs-N-Chocolate), we list the main corporate website, but not the individual representative/dealer sales sites.
Again, I recommend reading http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#affiliate , especially the section entitled "Multi-Level Marketing (MLM) and Pyramid Schemes". It should provide an answer to your questions. You will find that the main site of Cherubs-N-Chocolate is listed in http://dmoz.org/Business/Opportunities/Networking-MLM/C/ , and that's the only listing they should get under the guidelines.
I doubt your reply was deemed inappropriate, but I have noticed that some people have been having problems with posts getting through.
To answer your question: it does if it is part of a MLM scheme. In those cases (like Amway and Cherubs-N-Chocolate), we list the main corporate website, but not the individual representative/dealer sales sites.
Again, I recommend reading http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#affiliate , especially the section entitled "Multi-Level Marketing (MLM) and Pyramid Schemes". It should provide an answer to your questions. You will find that the main site of Cherubs-N-Chocolate is listed in http://dmoz.org/Business/Opportunities/Networking-MLM/C/ , and that's the only listing they should get under the guidelines.
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
I see. Well, I am by no means arguing, so don't take it that way, but Cherubs-N-Chocolate is not an MLM program. You buy the supplies from them and sell them however you like. That seems to me no different than any other business. I cannot sign up other dealers and the only person that profits from my business is the supplier, who happens to be C-n-C. Has there been some confusion about this or is it still considered a site that cannot be listed. Just would like to know for sure.
I see. Well, I am by no means arguing, so don't take it that way, but Cherubs-N-Chocolate is not an MLM program. You buy the supplies from them and sell them however you like. That seems to me no different than any other business. I cannot sign up other dealers and the only person that profits from my business is the supplier, who happens to be C-n-C. Has there been some confusion about this or is it still considered a site that cannot be listed. Just would like to know for sure.
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
So a site like say Amazon.com or practically any other business on the web would not qualify for listing, correct? Since they have those products on other sites of course.
So a site like say Amazon.com or practically any other business on the web would not qualify for listing, correct? Since they have those products on other sites of course.
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
It's not the accidental presence of content available on other sites that bars a site: it's the absence of content that's NOT available on other sites.
If you shopped for books very often, you'd know that Amazon has a whole server farm of content not available elsewhere (book reviews and "related books" links), as well as products not available elsewhere (OOP books), and it represents the unique online presence of an organization that offers services (i.e. shipment and customer service).
If it were not for those niggling details, we'd not list amazon.com.
It's not the accidental presence of content available on other sites that bars a site: it's the absence of content that's NOT available on other sites.
If you shopped for books very often, you'd know that Amazon has a whole server farm of content not available elsewhere (book reviews and "related books" links), as well as products not available elsewhere (OOP books), and it represents the unique online presence of an organization that offers services (i.e. shipment and customer service).
If it were not for those niggling details, we'd not list amazon.com.
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
So does that mean that the presence of the Cherubs-n-Chocolate products is not what keeps me from getting listed but just the lack of anything else? If I add content such as articles, etc. will that make the site elegible for inclusion?
So does that mean that the presence of the Cherubs-n-Chocolate products is not what keeps me from getting listed but just the lack of anything else? If I add content such as articles, etc. will that make the site elegible for inclusion?
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
It is _theoretically_ possible to add content to an affiliate-sales site to make it listable. But I have looked at over 50,000 site submissions, and I haven't seen anyone actually _do_ it. I am convinced it is for all practical purposes, psychologically impossible. I won't tell you not to try. I'll just say if you succeed, you'll be the first. (Most listable sites start out CONCEIVED as information sources, and add the "links to related Amazon books" as an additional resource for users. Such a site has a whole different look and feel than a "affiliate site with a fright wig on".
Quoting staff pilpul on the guidelines (from memory, with a most un-talmudic lack of verbal precision): "If a site's primary purpose seems to be to drive visitors to some other site for commercial gain, it should not be listed." It is hard to disguise a site's primary purpose.
Another way of thinking about it: if you can imagine a set of users who would go to a site, easily find the information they came for, WITHOUT BUYING ANYTHING, and leave satisfied and unirritated .... that site could be considered for listing.
It is _theoretically_ possible to add content to an affiliate-sales site to make it listable. But I have looked at over 50,000 site submissions, and I haven't seen anyone actually _do_ it. I am convinced it is for all practical purposes, psychologically impossible. I won't tell you not to try. I'll just say if you succeed, you'll be the first. (Most listable sites start out CONCEIVED as information sources, and add the "links to related Amazon books" as an additional resource for users. Such a site has a whole different look and feel than a "affiliate site with a fright wig on".
Quoting staff pilpul on the guidelines (from memory, with a most un-talmudic lack of verbal precision): "If a site's primary purpose seems to be to drive visitors to some other site for commercial gain, it should not be listed." It is hard to disguise a site's primary purpose.
Another way of thinking about it: if you can imagine a set of users who would go to a site, easily find the information they came for, WITHOUT BUYING ANYTHING, and leave satisfied and unirritated .... that site could be considered for listing.
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
Thank you. That was the type of fair answer I had hoped for. And this makes complete sense to me. Of course I won't have to worry about the affiliate part since my site is not redirecting traffic to another site, but your answer was very helpful all the same. One last note... While I agree that a site that has unique content is more valuable, I think (concerning your statement that a person should be able to leave satisfied without buying anything) that the editors should keep in mind when evaluating sites submitted to the shopping categories the purpose of a shopping category. But again, I totally agree with adding unique content to enhance the shopper's experience. Thanks again for wonderful explanation of the guidelines.
Thank you. That was the type of fair answer I had hoped for. And this makes complete sense to me. Of course I won't have to worry about the affiliate part since my site is not redirecting traffic to another site, but your answer was very helpful all the same. One last note... While I agree that a site that has unique content is more valuable, I think (concerning your statement that a person should be able to leave satisfied without buying anything) that the editors should keep in mind when evaluating sites submitted to the shopping categories the purpose of a shopping category. But again, I totally agree with adding unique content to enhance the shopper's experience. Thanks again for wonderful explanation of the guidelines.
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
>>I think (concerning your statement that a person should be able to leave satisfied without buying anything) that the editors should keep in mind when evaluating sites submitted to the shopping categories the purpose of a shopping category.<<
Except that hutcheson's post was perhaps slightly unclear about one point: As I understand it, if the only shopping content on your site is of the affiliate/networking/MLM non-unique variety, it will not be accepted in a Shopping/ category. No exceptions. The Shopping/ category contains sites with unique shopping content; adding information to your site will not change the nature of the shopping content. The Shopping Category FAQ also explains this in slightly more detail.
What hutcheson meant when he was explaining that you could "theoretically" add content to your site to make it listable, was that if you added enough information that your site could stand on its own as an informational site of some sort (not considering any shopping content), then it could be listed in an informational category -- but not a Shopping/ category. That's why he said that a person should be able to find the information, and leave satisfied without buying anything, in order for a site with that type of shopping content to be listable. If the main purpose of your site is to drive people to the non-unique shopping content, it wouldn't be eligible in an informational category, either. That's why hutcheson made the point that most informational sites start out as informational sites, and may add a few shopping links to pay the hosting fees, rather than starting out as shopping sites and adding a little information in order to get listed in the ODP. The webmasters of the latter type of sites are generally going to try to drive people to their sales. That's why they created the site, after all.
Making a good informational site is a lot of work, and will probably only succeed if you really want to offer non-commercial information as a service to people -- as a completely separate consideration from your sales hopes. Ask yourself, "Would I have made this information available even if I didn't want to get my sales site listed?" That question, if answered honestly, is usually a pretty good guide to the focus of the site, which is what an editor in an informational category will be considering.
>>I think (concerning your statement that a person should be able to leave satisfied without buying anything) that the editors should keep in mind when evaluating sites submitted to the shopping categories the purpose of a shopping category.<<
Except that hutcheson's post was perhaps slightly unclear about one point: As I understand it, if the only shopping content on your site is of the affiliate/networking/MLM non-unique variety, it will not be accepted in a Shopping/ category. No exceptions. The Shopping/ category contains sites with unique shopping content; adding information to your site will not change the nature of the shopping content. The Shopping Category FAQ also explains this in slightly more detail.
What hutcheson meant when he was explaining that you could "theoretically" add content to your site to make it listable, was that if you added enough information that your site could stand on its own as an informational site of some sort (not considering any shopping content), then it could be listed in an informational category -- but not a Shopping/ category. That's why he said that a person should be able to find the information, and leave satisfied without buying anything, in order for a site with that type of shopping content to be listable. If the main purpose of your site is to drive people to the non-unique shopping content, it wouldn't be eligible in an informational category, either. That's why hutcheson made the point that most informational sites start out as informational sites, and may add a few shopping links to pay the hosting fees, rather than starting out as shopping sites and adding a little information in order to get listed in the ODP. The webmasters of the latter type of sites are generally going to try to drive people to their sales. That's why they created the site, after all.
Making a good informational site is a lot of work, and will probably only succeed if you really want to offer non-commercial information as a service to people -- as a completely separate consideration from your sales hopes. Ask yourself, "Would I have made this information available even if I didn't want to get my sales site listed?" That question, if answered honestly, is usually a pretty good guide to the focus of the site, which is what an editor in an informational category will be considering.
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
Ok. I was in a better mood having recieved a good explanation, but it seems it didn't last long. I am going to make this point one last time, and then I am dropping the subject. Regardless of the fact that the possibilty seems to escape some of us, my site is not, never was, and never will be an affiliate, MLM, or any other referring type of site. I buy supplies for cash from the manufacturer, Cherubs-n-Chocolate, which by the way is not a MLM program or affiliate program. I use those supplies to create a product. I then sell those products on MY site that I designed. No one else gets any of that money, no one can sell them under me, no one sells them above me, and all of the process takes place on my site, with the exception of my shopping cart process being through PayPal. So as you can see, any comments regarding affiliate site, MLM sites, etc. do not apply to my site, and therefore do me no good.
Ok. I was in a better mood having recieved a good explanation, but it seems it didn't last long. I am going to make this point one last time, and then I am dropping the subject. Regardless of the fact that the possibilty seems to escape some of us, my site is not, never was, and never will be an affiliate, MLM, or any other referring type of site. I buy supplies for cash from the manufacturer, Cherubs-n-Chocolate, which by the way is not a MLM program or affiliate program. I use those supplies to create a product. I then sell those products on MY site that I designed. No one else gets any of that money, no one can sell them under me, no one sells them above me, and all of the process takes place on my site, with the exception of my shopping cart process being through PayPal. So as you can see, any comments regarding affiliate site, MLM sites, etc. do not apply to my site, and therefore do me no good.
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
I'm sorry that this is frustrating. The ban on individual representatives for MLM types of products includes direct selling, multi-level, and network marketing businesses. These all offer products through independent representatives, distributors, resellers, and consultants, and every IR for a company offers the same set of products. The ban isn't against the business technique, it is just that by definition, the products offered are not unique. We tend to focus on the MLM aspect because that is the biggest sorce of spam, and inadvertently confuse the issue to mean ~only~ MLM.
One possibility for creating an informational site for some of these businesses would be to focus about the personal business aspect in a regional sense. For example, some businesses are such that an IR might attend local fairs and thus may have a "show schedule". This may not apply to your business - just giving an example. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
I hope this clarifies a bit. <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" />
I'm sorry that this is frustrating. The ban on individual representatives for MLM types of products includes direct selling, multi-level, and network marketing businesses. These all offer products through independent representatives, distributors, resellers, and consultants, and every IR for a company offers the same set of products. The ban isn't against the business technique, it is just that by definition, the products offered are not unique. We tend to focus on the MLM aspect because that is the biggest sorce of spam, and inadvertently confuse the issue to mean ~only~ MLM.
One possibility for creating an informational site for some of these businesses would be to focus about the personal business aspect in a regional sense. For example, some businesses are such that an IR might attend local fairs and thus may have a "show schedule". This may not apply to your business - just giving an example. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
I hope this clarifies a bit. <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" />
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
I thank you for your patience in trying to explain this to me and apologize for the outburst. Yes, it is very frustrating to me. And here is why... Would you not agree that under the definitions given here for affiliate and multi-level sites that even someone selling say Hewlitt Packard printers would be unfit for listing? My concern is not only for myself interest in this, but also for the directory's usefulness. If these types of sites are forbidden based on these merits, then the directory becomes not a directory of websites, but merely a first come first serve listing. My focus being on the shopping directories, how useful are they if an individual can only find one vendor for a product? What about comparative shopping? And if this rule were followed as strictly as it has been portrayed here, many of the sites already listed would find themselves unincluded. Perhaps I am just confused as to what the purpose of a directory is, but I feel that these are valid points which merit some consideration and not just a form "no affiliate, no MLM" answer. Thanks again for hearing me out patiently.
I thank you for your patience in trying to explain this to me and apologize for the outburst. Yes, it is very frustrating to me. And here is why... Would you not agree that under the definitions given here for affiliate and multi-level sites that even someone selling say Hewlitt Packard printers would be unfit for listing? My concern is not only for myself interest in this, but also for the directory's usefulness. If these types of sites are forbidden based on these merits, then the directory becomes not a directory of websites, but merely a first come first serve listing. My focus being on the shopping directories, how useful are they if an individual can only find one vendor for a product? What about comparative shopping? And if this rule were followed as strictly as it has been portrayed here, many of the sites already listed would find themselves unincluded. Perhaps I am just confused as to what the purpose of a directory is, but I feel that these are valid points which merit some consideration and not just a form "no affiliate, no MLM" answer. Thanks again for hearing me out patiently.
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
<img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> It is a slippery slope going from pyramid/MLMs to independent reps/distributors to wholesale/retail sales. I wasn't part of the discussions that eventually led to the removal of the MLM sites so I can't really explain why the line was drawn where it was.
However, I would speculate that it has to do with the one-to-one relationship between the company's products and the IRs. Each IR sells the same set of products, and commonly the IRs can all be found from the company's website (locate a dealer near you). To a large extent, it all looks like part of one big company with a distributed sales force.
In contrast, an average store buys products from a variety of manufacturers and doesn't have a special relationship with them. Different stores carry a mix of different products. Yes, for any given product you can find lots of stores selling it, but each store is different.
Confusing, yes. From one perspective it seems unfair, but from another it is very consistent with the unique content rule. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />
<img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> It is a slippery slope going from pyramid/MLMs to independent reps/distributors to wholesale/retail sales. I wasn't part of the discussions that eventually led to the removal of the MLM sites so I can't really explain why the line was drawn where it was.
However, I would speculate that it has to do with the one-to-one relationship between the company's products and the IRs. Each IR sells the same set of products, and commonly the IRs can all be found from the company's website (locate a dealer near you). To a large extent, it all looks like part of one big company with a distributed sales force.
In contrast, an average store buys products from a variety of manufacturers and doesn't have a special relationship with them. Different stores carry a mix of different products. Yes, for any given product you can find lots of stores selling it, but each store is different.
Confusing, yes. From one perspective it seems unfair, but from another it is very consistent with the unique content rule. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
Agree with lissa...and if I didn't I'd defer to her experience. There is a slippery slope, and many affiliate sites try to obscure the real relationship as much as possible. (I believe the ODP stance on affiliates has caused the hotel reservation industry to completely re-engineer their cookie-cutters to better conceal the actual source of the data.)
Basically, once company "X" has been revealed as having an affiliate sales, MLM, networking, etc., program, we won't list any _other_ sites that sell their product online. At that point we don't care about their business model: they could be sending the orders back to the warehouse to be filled, or stealing product out of trailers at truck stops.
So far, Hewlett-Packard isn't signing up soccer moms to have printer parties with free demos of countertop publishing programs and neon-colored "fun ink cartridges." And if they have a "link to our catalog and get 5% commission on every sale" program, we haven't discovered it yet.
Agree with lissa...and if I didn't I'd defer to her experience. There is a slippery slope, and many affiliate sites try to obscure the real relationship as much as possible. (I believe the ODP stance on affiliates has caused the hotel reservation industry to completely re-engineer their cookie-cutters to better conceal the actual source of the data.)
Basically, once company "X" has been revealed as having an affiliate sales, MLM, networking, etc., program, we won't list any _other_ sites that sell their product online. At that point we don't care about their business model: they could be sending the orders back to the warehouse to be filled, or stealing product out of trailers at truck stops.
So far, Hewlett-Packard isn't signing up soccer moms to have printer parties with free demos of countertop publishing programs and neon-colored "fun ink cartridges." And if they have a "link to our catalog and get 5% commission on every sale" program, we haven't discovered it yet.
S
Starseed
Re: Status request for http://www.candybardesigns.
It's funny though considering I went to one category at random and found four sites on one page that were selling the same brand of products, and only that brand of products, yet they are still listed. To be honest, I think that the problem here is not that there are multiple resellers for Cherubs-n-Chocolate, but simply that some people have made an uneducated assumption as to the nature of their business.
It's funny though considering I went to one category at random and found four sites on one page that were selling the same brand of products, and only that brand of products, yet they are still listed. To be honest, I think that the problem here is not that there are multiple resellers for Cherubs-n-Chocolate, but simply that some people have made an uneducated assumption as to the nature of their business.