| 8:21 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Seems like they are trying to add a new twist to zeals method. Could work to get new editors. I would be surprized if people were paying that much for >PR6 links.
| 10:33 am on Mar 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
We removed the possibility to submit sites without being an editor because we were swarmed with spammy submissions and if the submissions weren't spam, 99% of them had very bad descriptions. We didn't want to end up with a very long queue with submissions (like DMOZ or even GoGuides).
You can become an editor in less than 5 minutes without taking any quizzes. So it won't cost you so much extra time. If someone wants to list his/her site, he (or she) should do the work by writing a descent description etc, and not us. At the moment we get 300 new editors each month, most of them submit 1 or 2 sites but there are also editors that stay and become higher level editors so they can review submissions of other editors.
Speed-Pass submissions are for people who don't have the time to wait until their submission is approved by the reviewing editors.
| 6:29 pm on Mar 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Just thought I would add my 2p. worth to the Joeant discussion.
I joined as an editor and subject to a couple of minor amendements imposed by a senior editor to the description, my sites were confirmed as accepted in minutes. They are on the ball and their setup is very efficient which to me is half the business battle won.
Dmoz could do with a shakeup and this could be it in a couple of years.
| 8:21 pm on Mar 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
JoeAnt doen't have 4 million sites in half a million categories though does it?
Can't compare the two like that.
| 8:56 pm on Mar 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
But it will have if it can continue with its current business plan. One way or another the ODP is now a disaster.
| 8:28 am on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>But it will have if it can continue with its current business plan
If you look at the number of sites JoeAnt is adding (check it on their additions page) it has averaged 80 a day recently, which is only 30,000 a year.
At that rate it would take 100 years to get to 3 million sites!
| 8:40 am on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I edit with GoGuides as well as the ODP. GoGuides could do with some help, they got a few thousand sitting unreviewed in the shopping and business cats and not many editors :(
| 2:54 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>> At that rate it would take 100 years to get to 3 million sites!
We don't want to be compared with dmoz, but how fast did they grow the first year? I thought the old webdirectory of Go.com had about 400.000 files listed and they were very popular.
| 3:24 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Interesting indeed. $40 is a reasonable amount of money. I agree that you can't compare JoeAnt with DMOZ. And I believe it's unfair to knock them because they are small.
I try not to limit myself to the direction the herd is going. Just because the herd isn't rushing over to JoeAnt isn't a reason NOT to help out.
| 4:06 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>> And I believe it's unfair to knock them because they are small.
I am with you all the way with that remark.
If they are small they have two choices, either to remain smaill (which may be indeed what their preference is) or to grow.
If they grow, then they will run into the "people management" problems that one perceives exist at ODP. But before they get to that point, they have to attract more editors, my guess would be around 10 times their current number of active editors.
To attract more editors, then they have to be better known. If they then succeed in getting more editors, it may be at the expense of ODP. My contention always has been that there are only a lmited number of individuals who are prepared to edit as volunteers.
| 5:15 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|but how fast did they grow the first year? |
Not to pick on JoeAnt, but DMOZ added about 1 million sites in the first year.
| 5:54 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
> You can become an editor in less than 5 minutes without taking any quizzes. So it won't cost you so much extra time.
Tried it and it worked exactly as advertized. Am still waiting for editor to approve or not my first submission, but the system seems very smooth.
Agreed, it is not clear how well it will scale up. But at the current levels, it works.
| 6:59 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Another reason to become an editor at JoeAnt (perhaps HBird64 will not thank me for saying so) is PR from the link.
JoeAnt has currently a front page PR of 6, which one would hazzard a guess should grow) therefore you should be able to get a link off around a PR 4 page, with comparatively small number of other links off it.
No doubt the carrot of getting more editors by offering free placement of sites to editors will cause more senior editors at JoeAnt to have to get involved in managing new, perhaps over enthusiastic, editors.
| 8:02 pm on Mar 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
We don't mind why editors add their sites, but getting a link from a nice PR page is one of them. You can get also additional links from our info pages when you add a link back to a topic. Each vistor to our site through that link creates a referral link to your site for each topic he/she visits. See for example http*//www.joeant.com/DIR/info/get/14722/29044
| 12:43 am on Apr 1, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think the Ants are doing a good job, but I balked at the paid submit so I'm just sticking with my free listings at GoGuides, Zeal and (finally) DMOZ.
| 1:12 am on Apr 1, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>but I balked at the paid submit so I'm just sticking with my free listings at ...
It takes the better part of 5 minutes to become an editor and submit your site for free.
| 8:33 am on Apr 1, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thereafter it took about the same time time to submit and have 5 sites approved.
The senior editors at JoeAnt merely police the juniors who do all the donkey work.
Perhaps dmoz should take note instead of just sitting in their ivory tower.
| 8:48 pm on Apr 1, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>If you look at the number of sites JoeAnt is adding (check it on their additions page)
>>it has averaged 80 a day recently, which is only 30,000 a year.
>>At that rate it would take 100 years to get to 3 million sites!
Cornwall, you forgot to factor in the 300 editors that sign up every month. Nothing on the Internet is a simple linear formula.
Track the acceleration in listings over the next 6 months, then do the math. Or track the acceleration in listings over the past 6 months, and do the math.
Don't forget, JoeAnt doesn't have PCP's adding sites, doesn't accept deeplinks period, and isn't the default directory for AOL, Netscape, Google, etc. It's a nice little directory, and it'll grow. Count on it.
They already have quite a few truly volunteer-minded editors.
| 2:23 pm on Apr 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>It's a nice little directory, and it'll grow. Count on it.
They already have quite a few truly volunteer-minded editors.
I am all the way with you on that, it is a nice directory and it will grow
>> you forgot to factor in the 300 editors that sign up every month
You have me there. I cannot find a record to show that 300 editors sign up every month, only that 1546 total editors are listed (I do not know if that is active or who have ever enlisted). And I think it has been going 2 years now.
However, whatever way you look at it there are comparatively few volunteer editors available to any directory on the web, that have the time and the honesty to produce volumes of quality edits every day.
Windharp suggested in another forum here that around 1000 editors did the bulk of the "work" at ODP. That figure is obviously much smaller at JoeAnt.
Provided the owners have the inclination to continue with JoeAnt then it will grow. I am perhaps highlighting the fact that more editors are needed if it is to reach "critical mass"
But where are these guys to come from, more are needed at ODP too :(
| 3:31 pm on Apr 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Number 1000 signed up on 02-12-03. This was after our server deleted 300+ inactive, bad emails and duplicate editor accounts. I don't know when we clean the database again.
| 10:20 pm on May 5, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>Just thought I would add my 2p. worth to the joeant discussion. I joined as an editor and subject to a couple of minor amendements imposed by a senior editor to the description, my sites were confirmed as accepted in minutes.
This matches my experience: five sites approved with edits within ten minutes. Very refreshing...
| 10:20 am on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I was an editor for a while at Joe Ant. The support and staff over there was pretty good for the most part. The only real problem I had was that when an editor would review my submission. If the site was rejected they would normally tell you what needs to be fixed at your anthill. Well, 2 of the editors that come to mind decided to be stuborn and only say 'read the rules'. If you've registered with Joe Ant to review sites than you know how vague the rules are. After several tries to re-submit and many messages in the forums I gave up. Other than that I really liked the directory. Very usefull.
| 12:14 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>> If you've registered with Joe Ant to review sites than you know how vague the rules are.
Even if you're not, the Guidelines are public: [joeant.com...] . Pretty much similar to the ODP Guidelines -- with the exception of Adult content considered as objectionable and a few other small differences -- and I'd say quite comprehensive...
As in any human-edited directory, I think that editorial discretion and common sense play a great role when it is necessary to go into small details, and where micromanaging every possible occurrence with straight rules could become a hard task.