Jordo, if you don't mind, I'm going to derail your thread a bit by asking people to direct their attention and efforts to this thread:
Directory Lists that Rank Directories: Good Stuff or Fluff? [webmasterworld.com]
Someday, in the not so distant future, I may open up a thread that attempts - with member participation - to craft a hierarchical list of directories. But for now I'd rather we attempt to "grow the dialogue" about HOW any of us might come to believe the merits of anyone else's ranked list of directories, instead of simply bearing witness to another thread where people post lists.
Hope that makes sense and that no offense is taken.
There are tons of threads concerned with listing directories and mostly they are not very illuminating. Most lists are built on nothing more than a ranking algo that considers 1 factor and 1 factor alone: Toolbar PR for the directory's index.htm page. I don't fault the practice as it's one of the few measures that a) anyone might have access to data; and, b) it's about as far as the dialouge has been taken to date. That said, if that is where this thread will venture, I'd rather we not go there as that has been done, again and again and again - using the same "thin" ranking criteria.
Just ask Google, the source of the directory ranking algo.
List of Directories [google.com]
[edited by: Webwork at 4:10 pm (utc) on Oct. 8, 2006]