homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.166.148.189
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Search Engines / Directories
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Webwork & skibum

Directories Forum

This 79 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 79 ( 1 2 [3]     
Is the DMOZ Server Repair Delay Undermining the ODP's or AOL's Reputation?
IF AOL/Netscape doesn't really want to support the ODP then what?
Ecaterina




msg:3171205
 9:47 pm on Nov 28, 2006 (gmt 0)

Moderator's Note: I've split this thread off from the existing "the DMOZ server is down" [webmasterworld.com] thread as I believe the continuing delay raises issues that merit airing, including what the lack of support may portend for the ODP and what, if anything, ought to take place.

This is NOT an invitation to speak poorly of the ODP. Like it or not the ODP is a volunteer enterprise and it is that volunteerism, in service of the project, that entitles the ODP and its numerous good faith editors to respect in my book. This problem is not of their making so "the ODP" - which IS the volunteers - ought not to take the brunt of any criticism for this lingering situation.

Thank you.

I stay to my opinion DMOZ is not what they intended to be. As an "authoritive" directory, to be down for more then 1 month now (6 weeks? I've been checking it daily since October 20 , I think) is really lame. And I don't count here broken links or inapropriate listings, nor submissions that takes years to shows up...really poor resource for Google

[edited by: Webwork at 1:35 am (utc) on Nov. 29, 2006]

 

hyperkik




msg:3176098
 7:08 pm on Dec 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

The use of its data, including that not available to the public. Somebody recently posted a clever use of the public RDF dump in the supporters forum.

hutcheson




msg:3176104
 7:16 pm on Dec 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

I have also been assuming AOL doesn't get direct income from the ODP. Now that you ask directly, I have no certain knowledge and can't prove it. I just think that's the way to bet.

hyperkik




msg:3176114
 7:24 pm on Dec 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

I don't. AOL keeps its ownership for a reason, it keeps the project up and running for a reason, and it has never claimed that it has any altruistic reason for doing so, or that it has ever lost so much as a penny.

I've heard from a former AOL employee that DMOZ editors would be surprised at the internal uses AOL makes of DMOZ data, suggesting that those uses more than justified the cost of maintaining the directory, but unfortunately he wouldn't share any details. He could have been pulling my leg, but I doubt it.

hutcheson




msg:3176156
 8:24 pm on Dec 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

Actually, that AOL has clever and surprising internal uses for the ODP data, I find VERY easy to believe (maybe almost too easy). Which makes the original question irrelevant: what does it matter to AOL whether they get cash from the ODP, so long as they get value? (It's easy to forget, but cash and value are not identical, nor are they fully convertible.)

AOL hasn't said much of anything about the ODP: editors were assured it would continue to be open to all users, which was the community's biggest concern. And the license had always given a LOT of leeway for "interesting" alternative uses. It's one of the attractions of editing that you not only help build something useful in itself, but you can enable others to dream things you never imagined.

foxfox




msg:3176472
 5:23 am on Dec 3, 2006 (gmt 0)


The use of its data, including that not available to the public. Somebody recently posted a clever use of the public RDF dump in the supporters forum.

can you give the link?
thanks.

hutcheson




msg:3177272
 5:24 am on Dec 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

I'm not sure why it matters what AOL does with ODP data. Are you suggesting that's why (unlike Zeal and Go) the ODP has a patron that's in it for the long term? (Which, if true, obviously would be some satisfaction to people who had put work into the directory.)

angiolo




msg:3178562
 12:50 pm on Dec 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

I think that the problem is not only a technical or a backup data problem.

After one month any small company is able to know something about their data....

Probably AOL is deciding something about Dmoz....

Too much silences here.....

hutcheson




msg:3179008
 7:20 pm on Dec 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

What kind of discussion were you expecting here?

angiolo




msg:3179075
 8:23 pm on Dec 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

I am just expecting "rumors"....

kevinpate




msg:3179941
 1:05 pm on Dec 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

> I am just expecting "rumors"....

AOL is selling ODP to the CIA
(Conglomeration of Internet Affiliates)

ODP Says "there, are ya happy now?"
For years some webmasters have suggested its
unfair that some sites get listed while their sites do not get listed. ODP currently is not listing any new sites for anyone.

ODP taken over by the Klingon Empire
The computer hardware is fine, but the software has been hijacked by the Empire. The Klingon High Council demands perfect spelling and exquisite sentence structure, in Klingon, before proceeding with any site suggestion.

I could come up with more, but well, while it ain't much, I still gots a life and I'm getting back to it now. :)

angiolo




msg:3180024
 2:19 pm on Dec 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

:) lol

Probably they can not change the message when you try a submission.

Service Temporarily Unavailable

We apologize for the inconvenience while we resolve technical problems. Please check back in a day or two.

.. in a day or two....

mcavic




msg:3183214
 6:38 am on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

I am just expecting "rumors"....

I think they ran out of disk space storing all the URLs that haven't been reviewed. And with three 500GB drives already dedicated to such, they can't fit any more in the machine.

sandyeggo




msg:3183249
 8:10 am on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

i would agree with that
my section had SO MANY sites to review it was sick. No way I could ever catch up.

System
redhat



msg:3183950
 8:59 am on Dec 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

The following 9 messages were cut out to new thread by webwork. New thread at: directories/3183948.htm [webmasterworld.com]
6:57 pm on Dec. 9, 2006 <small>(utc -5)</small>

FOLKS: Just a reminder. Please try to keep focus when it comes to DMOZ threads and if you have in mind to open up a new - especially a new and interesting issue - please start a new thread. I am more than happy to release new DMOZ threads so long as their substance is not, essentially, a grievance or the latest invitation to gripe. Thank you.

[edited by: Webwork at 12:13 am (utc) on Dec. 10, 2006]

hyperkik




msg:3185691
 11:25 pm on Dec 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

We apologize for the inconvenience while we resolve technical problems. Please check back in a day or two.

.. in a day or two....


The servers have been relocated to Venus, and thus when they say "day" they mean roughly 243 "Earth days".

hutcheson




msg:3185809
 2:20 am on Dec 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

Now, now, be fair: I don't think we've exceeded a Mercury day yet.

lgn1




msg:3188216
 2:37 am on Dec 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

As a systems analyst, I can tell you, server down time is like reverse dog years to the gozillion power. If any of my services are down for an hour people are upset. Once a particular service was down for a whole day, and it was considered a major outage.

7-8 weeks, trust me, its not a technical issue,unless they loss all their data or applications. I suspect that DMOZ is smart enough to do backups, and offsite backups at that, of all data and applications.

Even though DMOZ is a vounteer organization for editors, I hope they actually have paid competent IT staff to run their data centers.

<Snip - Sorry, funny page but outbound links to personal websites are invariably (99.9%) removed.>

[edited by: Webwork at 12:27 pm (utc) on Dec. 14, 2006]
[edit reason] WebmasterWorld TOS [/edit]

System
redhat



msg:3191572
 9:22 pm on Dec 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

The following 2 messages were cut out to new thread by webwork. New thread at: directories/3191570.htm [webmasterworld.com]
10:15 pm on Dec. 17, 2006 (utc -5)

System
redhat



msg:3193297
 4:13 am on Dec 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

The following 2 messages were cut out to new thread by engine. New thread at: directories/3193295.htm [webmasterworld.com]
2:58 pm on Dec. 19, 2006 (utc 0)

This 79 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 79 ( 1 2 [3]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Search Engines / Directories
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved