Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have been posting on this forum and been trying all possible methods to get the listing for <url removed> back on dmoz which was removed without any notifications inspite of being the best and the most popular website under the category : http://dmoz.org/Shopping/Jewelry/Watches/Replicas/

 

Till yesterday this section had 29 listings...today i found a new entry for <url removed>

 

To my surprise "There is no website configured at this address."

 

I wanna know whats going on.. wheres justice... its over 9 months to get my listed domain back.. i think dmoz is fixed..

 

CAN ANYBODY HELP .. OR JUST CLOSE THIS TICKET AND MOVE IT OUT... ???

Posted

Why do you think you should be notified when your site is listed or de-listed? And how many members accounts do you have?

 

What does CLOSE THIS TICKET mean?

Posted

i deserve being in dmoz

 

I dont need any explainations as such.. but there has to be some reason...

 

this makes one believe that this is not a fair play...

 

you can check out yourself.. that <url removed> compared to all 30 other domains listed in this category undoubtedly stands apart compare.. the content, design, domain age, google pr, alexa rating, customer reviews...

 

after having a great website it hurts when ur being rejected or ignored without any reasons...

 

i felt that this is the right place to express my grievence to the concern authorities.. just to put forth this matter...

  • Meta
Posted

Not only optional, but discouraged, as a matter of fact. However, I've never edited anywhere near that category (as far as I'm aware) so I have nothing to do with the delisting of the site. There is no secret about why that site is not listable, though. In fact it's obvious when you look at it, and I'm not sure why you would think that it could ever be listed in its current state.

 

Please refer to http://dmoz.org/license.html for more information.

Curlie Meta and kMeta editor nea
Posted

There certainly was a reason for the site's removal. May I suggest that you take a look at http://dmoz.org/license.html .

 

[Edit] Whoops! Nea got there first.

 

[Another edit] Thanks for letting us know about watchsolution.com, which I have now removed. It was not a new addition to the category. It was listed on 01/Jun/2004, when presumably there was suitable content.

Posted
Trademark violation? Did you read the ODP's license agreement? It's about using the ODP's content, not about any trademark violations in regards to copy-cat watches.
Posted

my humble request

 

Honarary editors and moderators... its my sincere request to please look into this matter and get the listing of <url rmeoved> back in dmoz...

 

I would be highly grateful... and i had no intentions of putting the blame of hurting anybodys feelings....

 

Its only that i have been really exploring all possible avenues to get the listing of <url removed> back again in this category which i feel that it rightly deserves...

Posted
You were give a resource to read. That resource will tell you everything you need to do in order to fix your current problem. That is much more than most get when there sites get removed. Your site will not be relisted in it's current state.
Posted
been trying all possible methods to get the listing for <url removed> back on dmoz

 

I just went there now, and i get redirected to a :

 

 

How can you even ask a reinclusion if you have that error in the website ?

Posted

Im not a tech guy

 

I really cannot understand where i have went wrong.. i have read the licensing throughly... there is absolutely no changes made to the layout of the website since it was dmoz listed...

 

I would appreciate if somebody could help me find some way out.

  • Meta
Posted
Expertu, it's just the link from princepatel's first posting in this thread that was edited, not an error in the site itself. :moz:
Curlie Meta and kMeta editor nea
Posted
Expertu, it's just the link from princepatel's first posting in this thread that was edited, not an error in the site itself. :moz:

 

Ok then. Sorry, i forgot to check the link itself. Maybe the anchor can be modified next time :)

Posted

I think the title was not appropriate

 

I just modified the title and description for <url removed> may be the previous title was not as per the guidelines..

 

Any help would be highly appreciated

Posted

Thanks a million

 

I really appreciate your help, it was very silly mistake that i overlooked... i admit that it was a blunder done at my end.

 

I have already updated the URL with the appropriate content.

 

Hopefully i should get listed again..

Posted
<url removed> shows dmoz logo with netscape copyrights notice.

 

Attribution Requirement. As a material condition of this Open Directory License, you must provide the below applicable attribution statements on (1) all copies of the Open Directory, in whole or in part, and derivative works thereof which are either distributed (internally or otherwise) or published (made available on the Internet and/or internally over any internal network/intranet or otherwise), whether distributed or published electronically, on hard copy media or by any other means, and (2) on any program/web page from which you directly link to/access any information contained within the Open Directory, in whole or in part, or any derivative work thereof:

 

1. If the Open Directory in whole or in part, or any derivative work thereof, is made available via the Internet or internal network/intranet and/or information contained therein is directly accessed or linked via the Internet or internal network/intranet then you must provide the appropriate Netscape attribution statement as described in the page(s) at the URL(s): http://dmoz.org/become_an_editor.

2. If the Open Directory in whole or in part, or any derivative work thereof, is made available on any hard copy media (e.g., CD-ROM, diskette), you must place on the packaging a notice providing Netscape attribution as described in the page(s) at the URL(s): http://dmoz.org/become_an_editor. If there is no `packaging', the previous attribution notice should be placed conspicuously such that it would be reasonably viewed by the recipient of the Open Directory.

3. If you are using or distributing the Open Directory in modified form (i.e., with additions or deletions), you must include a statement indicating you have made modifications to it. Such statement should be placed with the attribution notices required by Sections 2(a) and 2(b) above.

Posted

i have removed my content from dmoz directory

 

<url removed> i have removed my banners and backlinks...

i think now this is the default template... cannot go wrong this time :)

Posted
<url removed> i have removed my banners and backlinks...

i think now this is the default template... cannot go wrong this time :)

 

Dude :

 

The content of this directory is based on the Open Directory and may have been modified by us.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...