I have to agree with Freelist
I have come across the occasional great resource that should deserve publicity as the effort that has gone in is nothing to do with user submissions but just because someone is keen to list great resources.
My own example of a great resource on DMOZ is a serious illness my wife suffers from and the resource has been created by someone who has a good understanding of the illness and has listed great sources of help and information. " and seems to take great pride in keeping it updated " I have since met the guy on a forum related to the illness and understand why has done a great job. I do know that he only works on that one category ( Sorry not willing to include resource link as illness is a personal issue).
I do wonder if part of the problem with DMOZ has been multiple fold
1. Allowing User Submissions
2. Allowing editors to edit resources that they are not directly related in or do not have a deep understanding of
3. Moving in to highly competitive markets where greed or financial gain allow corruption.
I would love to see DMOZ re-emerge as a major force on the Internet but suspect it would take a major clean up of both the data and the editorial staff.
Although Wikipedia does have problems and I do worry about some of the content it is a great resource as a starting point providing you take the time to double check the data. They continue to refine how, who and what can be included which is why I suspect nearly all the search engines are giving them more exposure, I would love to see DMOZ move closer to WIKI than the way it has evolved.
I am sure there are many more great categories on DMOZ but because the number of poor spammy resources with dead, changed content or outright corrupt links far outweighs the gems, the time to find those great resources makes it not worth trying. I am sure I am not the only one that feels this way and suspect it is the same reason Search Engines do not give DMOZ more credence
PS sorry for such a long post