homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.163.84.199
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 77 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 77 ( 1 2 [3]     
State of the ODP: 3.5 million in, 1.1 million unreviewed.
rfgdxm1




msg:482452
 2:31 am on Dec 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

I just looked up the exact numbers, and the above are the current figures for today. If anyone is wondering exactly why it sometimes takes so long to get sites approved, the above statistics should reveal why. I do have access to the complete breakdown, but I don't think the Powers That Be at the ODP would approve of me revealing this publicly. However, the most backlogged categories are Business, Computers and Shopping. No surprised there about Business and Shopping, although this high number of unrevieweds in Computers surprises me. The percentage unrevieweds in Business as compared to the the number of listed sites is staggeringly high. Of course a lot of those are no doubt spam. However, the editors have to slog through the spam to get to the sites that should be listed.

 

kfander




msg:482512
 10:31 pm on Dec 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

We could always talk about the number of sites that the ODP HAS listed.

startup




msg:482513
 10:34 pm on Dec 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

"the reason why the Zeal model works so well is that Zealots *can't* add commercial sites. There isn't much incentive for abuse in categories with informational/hobby type sites. Thus, few such editors ever abuse their position. However, with the ODP also listing commercial sites, with the Zeal model where anyone with enough inclination can get to be editor of almost any cat, if the ODP did that I am sure *many* people would become ODP editors for corrupt reasons if the ODP used the Zeal model."

The above quote is very misleading. Pages from commercial sites can, and are, listed in the Zeal directory. Zeal lists pages much the same as Google assigns PR to a page and not a site. Each page stands on it's own whether or not the site is commercial.

rfgdxm1




msg:482514
 10:41 pm on Dec 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

Correct startup. Deep links on commercial sites with purely information content are allowed at Zeal. However, for the most part this isn't what gets listed at Zeal.

motsa




msg:482515
 10:55 pm on Dec 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

I have to admit that I don't personally find Zeal useful as a directory. The few times I've attempted to find something, I've either gotten a page of paid-for search results that was zero help with what I was looking for or I've ended up in a category where the bulk of the listings were deeplinks to the same site (which buried the sites that actually had the bulk of the useful information on the topic).

startup




msg:482516
 11:02 pm on Dec 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

I don't think the topic of this thread is to compare the search features of Dmoz and Zeal.

rfgdxm1




msg:482517
 12:22 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

>>You need to remember that these guys are volunteers, they do not have to turn up for "work" every day

Right. Or, perhaps more accurately is that my only duty as an ODP editor is to not abuse my editorial privileges. Although, a conscientious editor if they know they won't be able to edit properly for an extended period of time (say, much longer than one month), then probably they should contact the next editor up the tree and ask them to handle any greens that come it until they return.

>That is part of the problem. Some editors join soley to promote their "own" websites or are SEO pro's.

I'm sure some do, but I haven't seen much evidence that this happens to a significant degree. Likely in such cases they'd be easy to spot after complaints by their pattern of editing. Also, I think a lot of people blow the importance of the ODP WAY out of proportion. While being listed in the ODP is desirable, in most cases being listed doesn't hurt a site that much, and being listed doesn't help a site that much. Likely the only exception is some of the cats really high up the tree, where an ODP listing alone is enough to give a site a PR6.

rfgdxm1




msg:482518
 12:46 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

>To all the people that are moaning about the state of the ODP:

>1. If you are an editor already, then try to spend a bit more time helping out (i know a lot of you do a lot already!) - if everyone lends a hand then the job will get done that bit quicker.

(raises hand) I did. Recently I was approved as editor of Substance Abuse, which has beaucoup child cats and had over 500 greens sitting around. And, a lot of those greens had been sitting around since last sping, and one even from the year 2000 because it had been submitted to the wrong cat, and had been passed around by several editors previously until it made it where it belongs. Except for about 150 or so greens I am intentionally ignoring because they are in child cats that have editors who have logged in within the last month or so and I don't want to intrude on their cat space [and, hopefully they'll log in soon and edit, so I don't have to. ;)], I've dealt with almost all the other greens and reds. Complaining about the ODP won't make it better. To do that requires suitable people volunteering to be editors. And, try volunteering for a cat that could use some loving. Although, one problem is that there is no easy way to know if a cat has a lot of greens. This isn't displayed publicly anywhere. And, even ODP editors usually can't even find this out. Only reason I knew about the huge number of greens in Substance Abuse was because they showed up on my editor dashboard because the other cat space I edit has an @ link to Substance Abuse.

motsa




msg:482519
 1:34 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

I don't think the topic of this thread is to compare the search features of Dmoz and Zeal.

Maybe not but people seem to be spending a lot of time comparing the two. Just putting in my two cents.

GilbertZ




msg:482520
 2:02 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

I'm debating about helping in a cat I know a lot about.. sending an email to a meta explaining everything that went wrong with a particular cat, sites that should be added, sites that should be dropped, etc... but after having recently been rejected as editor, I'm thinking it will be a lot of work on my part that will be ignored... For those with experience, is it worth my time?

rfgdxm1




msg:482521
 2:11 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

>Maybe not but people seem to be spending a lot of time comparing the two. Just putting in my two cents.

Perhaps better to do this in a new thread? One problem with the Zeal model is that it actually tends to encourage lousy submissions, as getting such approved is the way to move "up the ladder" at Zeal. The ODP is much different. I sure as heck wouldn't impress any metas by adding a bunch of deeplinks from the same site. The ODP values quality more than quantity.

rfgdxm1




msg:482522
 2:21 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

GilbertZ, use the online application form. Suggest listing 3 great sites, with immaculate descriptions that meet the guidelines. Also, is the cat you want a very large one (including any child cats), or is it one that has a lot of abuse potential? If so, you might do well first applying to some smallish cat in need of some loving. Clean it up and make it a model cat at the ODP. Odds are probably better of getting approved once you are already an ODP editor somewhere, because in that case a meta may find it more difficult to reject you unless they can find a good reason why not to.

startup




msg:482523
 2:41 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

"One problem with the Zeal model is that it actually tends to encourage lousy submissions,"
If no one else is going to say this, you are out of line. Our willingness to openly discuss the directories does not allow you to degrade one.
Whole threads have been deleted because responses like yours.

rfgdxm1




msg:482524
 3:36 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

Huh, startup? This board is only for saying nice things about directories? And, in case you are unaware not only am I Zealot, but at the Expert Zealot level (the highest level of privileges), and edit a huge area of cat space with thousands of site profiles. In fact, I've got another window open at this moment editing some Zeal reds. Also note I didn't write that Zeal was all bad. Merely that there model has its weaknesses too. And, Zeal has some strengths. Most notably, at Zeal it is much easier to get into a position where you can build up the directory with quality sites. This model might not work so well over at the ODP because the ODP lists commercial sites, and thus has more abuse potential.

And, why criticize just me when motsa wrote "...or I've ended up in a category where the bulk of the listings were deeplinks to the same site (which buried the sites that actually had the bulk of the useful information on the topic)." I suspect the reason why is motsa found some categories where Zealots added lousy sites to get more points and privs. There actually is a way at Zeal to get to high levels of privs without lousy adds, it is just most people don't know it, and it isn't emphasized. That way is to adopted large cats with lots of site profiles that don't conform to the standards, and get points by editing those.

GilbertZ




msg:482525
 5:38 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

GilbertZ, use the online application form. Suggest listing 3 great sites, with immaculate descriptions that meet the guidelines.

I did exactly that...I worked pretty hard on the descriptions and am pretty sure they were very good...and the sites most certainly belonged in the cat...There are around 50 sites in that cat...

Also, is the cat you want a very large one (including any child cats), or is it one that has a lot of abuse potential?

The cat is itself a child cat..I can't tell if there are more child cats...there are a couple of cats listed under that one however when you click on it, this cat is not listed as a parent? RE: abuse potential, meaning in what way?

If so, you might do well first applying to some smallish cat in need of some loving.

By small, how many listings should there be?

Clean it up and make it a model cat at the ODP. Odds are probably better of getting approved once you are already an ODP editor somewhere, because in that case a meta may find it more difficult to reject you unless they can find a good reason why not to.

OK, when I see a cat that I think I can help out in I'll give it a shot... Thanks.

rfgdxm1




msg:482526
 6:07 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

>The cat is itself a child cat..I can't tell if there are more child cats...there are a couple of cats listed under that one however when you click on it, this cat is not listed as a parent? RE: abuse potential, meaning in what way?

Since this isn't the proper forum, use this boards stickymail feature to tell me the specific cat. I'd need to check this out to determine if their are any child cats. Because an editor of a cat also can edit the child cats, the number of sites in the child cats is highly relevant. By abuse potential I mean the level of concern that a meta might have someone might apply to be editor with impure motives. Commercial cats are the highest in this regard, and cats that just list informational sites tend to be the lowest.

>By small, how many listings should there be?

Usually 30 sites listed or less. However, you might get approved for a cat with as many as 100 sites or so if it happens to be a neglected one in need of some loving.

cornwall




msg:482527
 8:57 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

I sure as heck wouldn't impress any metas by adding a bunch of deeplinks from the same site. The ODP values quality more than quantity.

The error in the logic is that deeplinks do not mean (necessarily) a lack of quality. Perhaps you could clarify this remark? If it were true, the implications are worrying

If the DMOZ policy is that deep links can be allowed when appropriate, then a problem comes with non metas able to exercise proper judgement on when deep links are appropriate.

Those editors may refuse deep links out of hand, either for a quiet life (don't want the local heavy browbeating them), or mistakenly believe that all deeplinks should be deleted.

This then adds to the weight of submissions. Let me give you an example.

I have a site that covers all 50 US states on a specialist topic. Half are deep linked to individual states, the rest are not. I have no idea why the ones that have not been added are not in ...could be they have been rejected, chainsawed, not yet reviewed.

So...I resubmit...to the unreviewed queue

bird




msg:482528
 10:52 am on Dec 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

>>I sure as heck wouldn't impress any metas by adding a bunch of deeplinks from the same site. The ODP values quality more than quantity.

The error in the logic is that deeplinks do not mean (necessarily) a lack of quality. Perhaps you could clarify this remark? If it were true, the implications are worrying

I think an implied part of the original statement goes like "...to the same category (or subcategories thereof)".
The guidelines say that not more than one (deep)link to the same site should be listed in categories that can reached from each other with a single click. If several parts of a site are relevant to a specific area of the directory, then the correct solution is to list the complete site there once (possibly mentioning the relevant sections in the description).

One of the important side-goals of the ODP is to avoid redundancy in its taxonometry. This is also the reason why large parts of the directory are under constant reorganization, in order to better adapt to the changing requirements.

Whether individual deeplinks to clearly seperate categories (eg. different locations in Regional) are accepted depends on how much value they would add to each individual location. Assuming that the amount of unique content is roughly the same, then the chances of a listing may be better in smaller categories that don't have a lot of comparable entries yet.

This 77 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 77 ( 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