
<H1 align="center">Identifying and Reporting Editor Abuse</H1>
<ul>
  <li><a href="#Worthy">Practices Worthy of Investigation</a> 
  <li><a href="#Selfcool">Self-Cooling</a>
<li><a href="#TitlesandDescriptions">Manipulation of Titles and Descriptions</a>
<li><a href="#Affiliate">Adding Affiliate Sites</a>
<li><a href="#Unreviewed">Mass-Deletion from Unreviewed</a>
<li><a href="#Deeplinks">Deeplinks</a>
<li><a href="#Multiple">Editors with Multiple Accounts</a>
<li><a href="#Reporting">Reporting Abuse</a>
<li><a href="#Conclusion">Conclusion</a>
</ul>     

        
<h3>Introduction</h3>
        
<p>The goal of the ODP is to create the largest, most comprehensive directory 
  of websites. This goal is shared by the majority of its editors, unfortunately 
  there are some whose goals contradict these, and it is these editors that need 
  to be educated or removed to ensure the Directory's reputation will not be damaged.</p>
<p>This document provides an overview of common abusive tactics, and explains 
  how to report suspected abuse.</p>
<h3><A name=Worthy></A>Practices Worthy of Investigation</h3>
        
<p>Abuse occurs throughout the Directory, and it is not always obvious as to where 
  it is occurring. If you see any behaviour that you deem suspicious then please 
  look into the logs of category and editor -- there is no harm in looking, and 
  you may be helping to uncover abuse. </p>
<h3><A name=Selfcool></A>Self-Cooling</h3>
        <P>This is where editors award the 'cool' designation to sites that they 
          are affiliated with. It is specifically prohibited in the guidelines. 
        <P>'Affiliated' is generally defined as a situation where the editor has 
          something to gain from the site's improved exposure. The most obvious 
          case of affiliation is where the editor owns the site in question. However, 
          other situations include, but are not limited to: the editor being related 
          to the site owner, having worked on the design team, or a contributor 
          of content to the site. 
        
<p>If you have permission in the category where a site has been self-cooled, by 
  all means uncool it. However in addition you should <a href="#Reporting">report</a> 
  the situation to a meta editor.</p>
<h3><a name=TitlesandDescriptions></a>Manipulation of Titles and Descriptions</h3>
        <p>Another way unscrupulous editors can make a particular site stand out 
          is to change the title and/or description. Some tricks commonly used 
          are:</p>
        <ul>
          <li>Attempting to take advantage of the alphabetic sorting algorithm. 
            I.e. sites are displayed in alphabetical order, if an editor wishes 
            for a specific site to stand out then they can use a title like 'AAAA 
            Trout Fishing', causing the listing to be sorted to the top.</li>
          <li> Making the description of one site markedly different from the 
            others in a category. For instance most sites in a category could 
            be described with a one sentence list of their contents, but one site 
            could have a description of a paragraph in length, using capital letters.</li>
        </ul>
        <p>Basically, any method to distinguish one site from the others in the 
          category by use of similar techniques should be considered abusive.</p>
        
<h3><font color="#669933"><a name="Affiliate"></a></font>Adding Affiliate Sites</h3>
        <p>If an editor belongs to affiliate schemes they may try to add links 
          that include affiliate tags so that each time the URL is accessed the 
          editor will benefit. The URLs follow a different format for each site, 
          however if you know what one can look like then you will have a better 
          idea of how to identify them. </p>
        <p>They generally contain an identification code unique to the affiliate. 
          An example affiliate tag is <tt>http://www.netflip.com/index.jsp?referrer=urmine41</tt> 
          The '<tt>urmine41</tt>' section is the affiliate's name. The same link 
          can usually be accessed with the affiliate tag omitted, for instance: 
          <tt>http://www.netflip.com/</tt> this will take you to the same page, 
          but will not benefit the affiliate. <BR>
        </p>
        <p>There is no hard and fast rule for recognising such links unfortunately, 
          but there are some pointers that may be useful. If a URL is in the form 
          example.com/ it is almost certainly not an affiliate link, it provides 
          no way in which to identify the tags owner. If the URL looks to contain 
          what could be an affiliate tag, i.e. a string that contains either letters, 
          numbers of any combination thereof, then there are some ways in which 
          you can ascertain its true nature: </p>
        <ul>
          <li>Go to the main page of the site, which in the above example would 
            be <a href="http://www.amazon.com/"><tt>http://www.netflip.com/</tt></a>and 
            see if you can find any evidence of an affiliate scheme in action. 
            If you can, then check the sign-up page for details of how the affiliate 
            URLs look.</li>
          <li>Go to the main page and try to search for the item, or follow internal 
            links. For instance, if the page is about a specific hotel on a hotel 
            site then try searching for that hotel. If the URL of the page is 
            different after accessing it that way then there is a chance that 
            the original link may have had an affiliate tag on it.</li>
        </ul>
        
<h3><font color="#669933"><a name="Unreviewed"></a></font>Mass-Deletion from Unreviewed</h3>
        <p>Some editors feel that a high number of unreviewed sites in a category 
          is inherently bad, and choose to delete them rather than deal with them 
          in an appropriate manner. A variation of this is when editors delete 
          submissions that are inappropriate for their category, as opposed to 
          attempting to find the correct category and moving the site there. </p>
        
<p>This type of abuse is alarmingly rampant, and is detrimental to the Directory's 
  growth. </p>
        <p>It can be detected in two main ways:</p>
        
<ul>
  <li> You notice that the number of unreviewed in a category has droppped dramatically, 
    or at a significantly faster pace than normal. (Keep in mind that this could 
    simply be caused by a new editor in a particular sub-category or a higher 
    level editor helping out.)</li>
  <li>You notice, while adding sites from Unreviewed, that they have previously 
    been deleted. (In many cases this was appropriately done because the sites 
    were submitted more than once; there will usually be notes left to that effect.) 
  </li>
</ul>
<h3><font color="#669933"><a name="Deeplinks"></a></font>Deeplinks</h3>
        
<p>Adding a deeplink is not an abusive action. The abusive element occurs when 
  deeplinks of a specific site, usually belonging to the editor, are added inappropriately. 
</p>
        <p>Examples of this include:</p>
        <ul>
          <li> Adding multiple deeplinks to a specific site in the same category. 
            This can easily be detected by the similarity in URLs. I.e. <tt>http://example.com/One</tt> 
            , <tt>http://example.com/Two</tt> .</li>
          <li> Adding deeplinks to a specific site in multiple categories, when 
            the root URL is listed in the parent category. For instance a site 
            about a singer is listed in the appropriate category a deeplink for 
            it discussion forum may be listed in the Chats_and_Forums category, 
            the deeplink to its news page may be listed in the News category, 
            and so on.</li>
          <li>Creating a category to hold mainly deeplinks for a specific site. 
            This extreme case of action is sometimes referred to as creating a 
            vanity category, i.e. one in which the editor can list sites that 
            they are affiliated with. This is nearly always abusive. </li>
        </ul>
        <p>To determine whether or not a domain is deeplinked, you can search 
          for the host name on dmoz.org. For instance if you wanted to find out 
          where and how <tt>http://www.example.com/</tt> was deeplinked then you 
          could search on 'example.com'</p>
        <p>Remember that just because a domain is deeplinked does not necessarily 
          indicate abuse. It is the manner in which it is linked that can be construed 
          as abusive.</p>
        
<h3><font color="#669933"><a name="Multiple"></a></font>Editors with Multiple 
  Accounts</h3>
        <p>The ODP has a policy of one account per person. One person having multiple 
          accounts constitutes abuse.</p>
        <p> There are some editors who are unaware of this fact, and may openly 
          admit to having multiple accounts. However, given that in the majority 
          of situations multiple accounts are used to further abusive agendas, 
          there can be no exceptions.</p>
        <p>You may notice a site (or sites), owned by a specific entity, being 
          exclusively edited by two editors. You may also notice that a fired 
          editor has returned under a new guise. In any case, please report your 
          suspicions.</p>
        
<h3><font color="#669933"><a name="Reporting"></a></font>Reporting Abuse</h3>
        
<p>If you feel that you have identified a case of abuse then you should report 
  it. The <a href="http://dmoz.org:8080/editors/abuse.cgi?action=report">official Abuse 
  Report feature</a> is linked from the bottom of your dashboard and is the preferred 
  method of reporting your concerns. Alternatively, a list of metas who have indicated 
  a willingness to deal with abuse reports can be found at <a href="http://dmoz.org:8080/Test/ODP/AbuseBusters/">Test/ODP/AbuseBusters</a>.</p>
<p><b>Note:</b> Non-editors should use the <a href="/report-abuse/">Public Abuse Report System</a> to communicate their suspicions.</p>
<p>When reporting suspected abuse you should include as many facts as possible 
  that will help the investigating editor in their job.</p>
<h3><font color="#669933"><a name="Conclusion"></a></font>Conclusion</h3>
        
<p> Abuse is a broad concept, and as such can be difficult to clearly define or 
  explain. Editors may use combinations of the above methods or completely new 
  methods to abuse the Directory. Whatever the case, all editors should be on 
  guard. Investigating cases of abusive editing is important in maintaining and 
  protecting the integrity of the Directory. Any time dedicated to identifying 
  abuse is time well spent.<br>
