Aug 24th 2009 11:23AM
What is Editor Abuse?
Hi everyone!
At DMOZ, we get tons of questions about what editor abuse actually is and how to spot it. In this post, meta editor jensarentoft has provided a very useful primer on the signs and symptoms of abuse, and what to do if you suspect it.
Emily
- - - - - - - - - -
The ODP Editor Guidelines explain the different types of abuse. Examples of abuse that are not tolerated - and may result in account removal - include, but are not limited to:
Editorial abuse
Manipulating or deleting submissions and listings of competitors.
Adding inappropriate sites or adding sites in inappropriate categories.
Repeated and egregiously poor editing, despite feedback and/or a dashboard warning.
Self-promotion
Cooling your own site or affiliated sites.
Title or description manipulation.
Adding/promoting only one's own sites or affiliated sites.
Creating vanity categories to showcase one's own sites or affiliated sites.
Other violations
Accepting or soliciting bribes in exchange for listing.
Uncivil and intentionally disruptive behavior.
Violating the confidentiality of the forums, editor notes etc.
Concealing affiliations.
Spamming the directory.
One ODP editor having more than one account or sharing the account with others.
Is it abusive for editors to list their own sites?
Editors are allowed to list their own site(s) or affiliated sites provided that their sites meet all listing criteria and that they also list other sites. There is no official number for how many other sites the editor must list to stay clear of self-promotion. Editall+ editors are allowed to list their own sites in appropriate categories all over the directory, and that is no problem because they usually have listed thousands of other sites.
Editors are only allowed to list their site(s) in the category in which they have active editor permissions, and only if the site is appropriate for the category. Asking other editors to list a site in a category is considered self-promotion and is not allowed. Instead, editors must suggest their sites to other categories just like non-editors.
When are editing privileges removed?
Editors can learn about how to prevent abuse by using guidelines, reading editor forums, and receiving feedback from senior editors. In serious matters, they may receive dashboard warnings. Metas, Catmods and Admins make every effort to keep editors on track and make them feel good about being part of this international online community.
Some cases of abuse are very clear. Any editor who accepts bribes or deletes competitors´ sites will find that his or her time as an editor is running out.
In many cases, however, a warning is issued to an editor before removal. This helps to ensure that an editing transgression is truly due to abuse and is not simply the result of gaps in an individual editor's understanding of the category or listing guidelines. It is important to note that there is a difference between poor editing or honest editorial mistakes and editor abuse, and it isn't always apparent which has occurred to people looking from the outside; however, some practices that are visible to the public are good indicators of abuse and we'd like to know about those. A list of these can be found in the "Report Abuse" section below.
Removing editing privileges must be supported by at least five Meta editors and is used only if nothing else works.
How is abuse found?
Abuse is found in various ways and not only from abuse reports submitted by the public or by editors. One of the tasks of the Meta editors is fighting abuse, and senior editors have a number of abuse-fighting resources at their disposal.
An easy way to spot abuse is to look for titles and descriptions that are not in accordance with the guidelines. You also can look for inappropriate sites listed against the guidelines about which sites not to include. If you want to look for mirrors, affiliates, and similar sites, you can find tips in this newsletter.
Report abuse
If you spot any signs or symptoms of abuse, please use this link to the Open Directory Public Abuse Report System to report it. All reports will be investigated and are visible to all Metas, Admins and Staff. Abuse reports against Metas are investigated by Admins and Staff.
Some signs of abuse which are visible to non-editors include:
Directory users sometimes see sites listed in categories where they are no longer relevant or where the description they have been provided with is no longer accurate) and suspect editor abuse. In most cases, this is simply the result of an expired/hijacked domain, or a site whose owners have changed its focus since it was originally listed. In these cases, it's better to file a request to update the listing and to post in the Resource Zone Quality Control thread so that an editor can take a look at it.
To help us investigate your report please include as much relevant information as you can. This may include:
At DMOZ, we get tons of questions about what editor abuse actually is and how to spot it. In this post, meta editor jensarentoft has provided a very useful primer on the signs and symptoms of abuse, and what to do if you suspect it.
Emily
- - - - - - - - - -
The ODP Editor Guidelines explain the different types of abuse. Examples of abuse that are not tolerated - and may result in account removal - include, but are not limited to:
Editorial abuse
Manipulating or deleting submissions and listings of competitors.
Adding inappropriate sites or adding sites in inappropriate categories.
Repeated and egregiously poor editing, despite feedback and/or a dashboard warning.
Self-promotion
Cooling your own site or affiliated sites.
Title or description manipulation.
Adding/promoting only one's own sites or affiliated sites.
Creating vanity categories to showcase one's own sites or affiliated sites.
Other violations
Accepting or soliciting bribes in exchange for listing.
Uncivil and intentionally disruptive behavior.
Violating the confidentiality of the forums, editor notes etc.
Concealing affiliations.
Spamming the directory.
One ODP editor having more than one account or sharing the account with others.
Is it abusive for editors to list their own sites?
Editors are allowed to list their own site(s) or affiliated sites provided that their sites meet all listing criteria and that they also list other sites. There is no official number for how many other sites the editor must list to stay clear of self-promotion. Editall+ editors are allowed to list their own sites in appropriate categories all over the directory, and that is no problem because they usually have listed thousands of other sites.
Editors are only allowed to list their site(s) in the category in which they have active editor permissions, and only if the site is appropriate for the category. Asking other editors to list a site in a category is considered self-promotion and is not allowed. Instead, editors must suggest their sites to other categories just like non-editors.
When are editing privileges removed?
Editors can learn about how to prevent abuse by using guidelines, reading editor forums, and receiving feedback from senior editors. In serious matters, they may receive dashboard warnings. Metas, Catmods and Admins make every effort to keep editors on track and make them feel good about being part of this international online community.
Some cases of abuse are very clear. Any editor who accepts bribes or deletes competitors´ sites will find that his or her time as an editor is running out.
In many cases, however, a warning is issued to an editor before removal. This helps to ensure that an editing transgression is truly due to abuse and is not simply the result of gaps in an individual editor's understanding of the category or listing guidelines. It is important to note that there is a difference between poor editing or honest editorial mistakes and editor abuse, and it isn't always apparent which has occurred to people looking from the outside; however, some practices that are visible to the public are good indicators of abuse and we'd like to know about those. A list of these can be found in the "Report Abuse" section below.
Removing editing privileges must be supported by at least five Meta editors and is used only if nothing else works.
How is abuse found?
Abuse is found in various ways and not only from abuse reports submitted by the public or by editors. One of the tasks of the Meta editors is fighting abuse, and senior editors have a number of abuse-fighting resources at their disposal.
An easy way to spot abuse is to look for titles and descriptions that are not in accordance with the guidelines. You also can look for inappropriate sites listed against the guidelines about which sites not to include. If you want to look for mirrors, affiliates, and similar sites, you can find tips in this newsletter.
Report abuse
If you spot any signs or symptoms of abuse, please use this link to the Open Directory Public Abuse Report System to report it. All reports will be investigated and are visible to all Metas, Admins and Staff. Abuse reports against Metas are investigated by Admins and Staff.
Some signs of abuse which are visible to non-editors include:
- Editors giving preferential treatment to their sites. This includes self-cooling (awarding of the 'cool' designation to affiliated sites) and keyword-stuffing (proving longer and/ or more favourable titles and descriptions to affiliated sites).
- Editors adding inappropriate sites. This can be done accidentally, of course, but of special concern is the adding of pornographic sites outside of Adult/, affiliate links, mirrors, and doorways.
- Sites listed in the Kids & Teens branch which present Adult content material.
- Biased/slanted categories. The ODP aims to represent all viewpoints and topics equally and fairly; categories designed to unfairly exclude/marginalise a particular outlook/interpretation are disallowed.
- Editors accepting bribes. We have no tolerance whatsoever for any bribery attempts. All submissions to the ODP are completely free; any editor found to be accepting bribes will be removed.
Directory users sometimes see sites listed in categories where they are no longer relevant or where the description they have been provided with is no longer accurate) and suspect editor abuse. In most cases, this is simply the result of an expired/hijacked domain, or a site whose owners have changed its focus since it was originally listed. In these cases, it's better to file a request to update the listing and to post in the Resource Zone Quality Control thread so that an editor can take a look at it.
To help us investigate your report please include as much relevant information as you can. This may include:
- Affected categories/ editors/ sites.
- A description of the alleged abuse.
- Proof of editors' affiliations with specific sites.
- Copies of e-mails (including full-headers where possible).
- Details of any past correspondence you have had with the ODP.
- Your e-mail address. This is vital if you want feedback on your report.
21. I posted some of the following in another thread but I think it belongs in this one:
Do people still work for DMOZ?
I reported a case of abuse on September 11, 2007 and when I check for any results I just keep getting:
"Its current status is new - This report has not yet been investigated. We aim to do so at the earliest possible opportunity. :)"
The case actually involves two editors. I did not report them for any personal gain (I've never submitted any of my sites to DMOZ) and I am not doing this in support of any particular site.
I am only trying to right a wrong for the good of the community (of the topic) - so that the information people can find about the topic is as honestly as possible the best there is about the topic. I thought that was what DMOZ was (originally) all about.
Higher up on this page Emily posted:
"Report abuse
If you spot any signs or symptoms of abuse, please use this link to the Open Directory Public Abuse Report System to report it. All reports will be investigated and are visible to all Metas, Admins and Staff. Abuse reports against Metas are investigated by Admins and Staff."
I have the case number still and it was submitted on was submitted on 2007-09-11 17:51. After two years I must ask:
Is the system is broken?
Is there any control of abuse?
How can this be tolerated?
Otherwise, I am wrong and another possible explanation is that maybe these editors later became Metas, Admins and Staff and have hidden my report of abuse?
Quite a mystery.
Posted at 6:36AM on Sep 23rd 2009 by Michael
22. I applied to be an editor in a category that didn't have an editor. Of course I was rejected that is why I am posting here. The respose I got was full of spelling mistakes and inaccurate observations.
It seems to me that various editors have got in and are attempting to hold on to too much control too far up the tree. These editors seem to have lost the plot when it comes down to understanding regional areas down at root level. Maybe because they are so far removed.
Why is it that people are waiting years to get listed. I am beginning to think that the ODP is simply a SEO scam in its entirity. Meanwhile lots of people are wasting thousands of hours of time attempting to submit. I don't trust this organisation anymore and the tree is such a mess its not worth searching the directory.
Posted at 6:55PM on Oct 18th 2009 by Paul
23. I am humor-blogger & I am trying to add my site in dmoz from last year i submit all detail as per dmoz policies, but i can't succeed. can anyone help me?
Posted at 9:34AM on Oct 30th 2009 by Syed Hur Abbas Naqvi
24. I submitted my site a few months ago and it is not yet listed. I would like my site to be included and feel that it fully deserves to be. Thank you.
Posted at 10:25PM on Nov 3rd 2009 by zxyzjy
25. I was trying to post to a previous blog entry dated June 26th 2009: "Why are sites sometimes removed from the directory?":
My site was removed from the directory following a request for a change of URL recently. It was formerly hosted by Geocities which closed shop on October 26th 2009.
The site had been in the directory for several years, I believe since 2001 and no less useful than A Century of China,Lateline News and CND.
Naturally I was disappointed but would still like to find a spot in the directory.
Posted at 3:20AM on Nov 16th 2009 by Pen
26. Our site has been remove after more yhan 2 years of presence in the dmoz directory at this category: http://www.dmoz.org/Games/Gambling/Guides/Reviews/ we didn't broke any rules, we didn't ask more submissions ..we was just removed from there and we would like to know why.
Different people in the forums replied me assuming dmoz editors corruption, but how can we verify if this is true or just absurd hypothesis??
we need our listing back ..please help us.
Posted at 8:51AM on Nov 18th 2009 by free
27. I was an editor way back in the day, probably more than 10 years ago now, for a rural community under regional. I got booted. I had to beg and beg for a reason why. Because I did websites around town and added them, I guess I was an abuser. Even though I added any other local sites I found as well. I set up the directory structure and added all of the original links for my community, some of them are even still there. I run my own directory for my local area, I have 10 times as many local links as you can find on dmoz. I would have kept dmoz more complete and up to date for my local area, and I would have kept my local area better promoted. Can't have that though, so much better to be dusty and irrelevant. And just look at all the people lining up to take my place ;-)
Is there a history of that kind of stuff stored in the background? How far back does it go? It sure would be fun to see how agitated I got about it all so long ago!
Just stopped in - not even sure why this place even crossed my mind after so long, and read the 1 news story for this year under about odp, that linked to this blog posting, and thought I'd take a look and see how things were going. Nope, not worth applying again, and would probably be denied anyway, apparently if anyone would even look at my application within the year. dmoz was a great idea, that has been managed into a lame relic of the 90s. Sad.
Peace.
Posted at 12:16PM on Nov 18th 2009 by Mike
28. There is a problem with the email id apply@dmoz.org. After filling the application form i got a verification email bit i couldn't reply as said in the mail. Any alternative ?
Posted at 12:23PM on Nov 20th 2009 by dheeraj_932