| 4:56 am on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It sounds like it will be tough to live up to their new slogan "The spam free web search"!
| 7:20 am on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
This relates to
JoeAnt have already been along this route
I am not convinced that "press ganged" editors will do anything for these directories other than add spam - and hence require large amounts of management time to both process applications and police work of said editors once they have joined.
| 8:32 am on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
On the other hand a low-cost listing reviewed in a reasonable amount of time is an attractive option.
|Paul in South Africa|
| 8:36 am on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|only problem is that those guides are BOUND to be motivated by self-interest if they are invited to edit in order to get listed |
I edit in both DMOZ and GoGuides and yes, my initial motivation in both cases was self-interest. I have added some of the sites that I am responsible for to both directories but there are many more that I have not added because they do not comply with the guidelines in one way or another. I am working on those sites to make them guideline compliant where possible although some of them will never deserve a listing.
Since becoming involved in both directories my motivation has changed and I now tend to add quality sites, whether they compete with my own or my customer's site or not beacuse I have realized that that is the true (not always achieved) aim of these directories. Possibly I am lucky and do not edit in areas that receive a lot of spam submissions which makes editing a great deal easier.
I'll get off my soapbox now ;)
| 6:46 pm on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I would have to edit a large section in order to submit sites from all islands and various localities - that sounds like it could be a lot of work if the directory grows (even if it does take only 5 minutes to join).
| 6:57 pm on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I am not convinced that "press ganged" editors will do anything for these directories other than add spam - and hence require large amounts of management time to both process applications and police work of said editors once they have joined. |
Interesting thought there cornwall, how did you come to that?
If you apply to edit you wont get a large category to start with, its similar to the ODP you need to start small and prove yourself as an editor and then move through the ranks and you will gradualy get larger cats.
| 7:44 pm on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
'JoeAnt have already been along this route'
But the difference with GoGuides and DMOZ is everyone who applies to JoeAnt is immediately approved as an editor, and you will have a lot of topics where you can add sites.
BTW, we don't have much spam submissions, and they will never get in because each submission is checked by a higher editor.
| 9:34 pm on May 16, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>require large amounts of management time to both process applications and police work of said editors once they have joined.
The fact that JoeAnt take everyone who applies surely means
1. Most editors do one edit (their own site) and stop editing. In the old Go directory, where there were public records available, around 99 out of 100 editors only ever did the one edit
2. This must therefore mean that senior editors (of whom you only have very small numbers) have to spend large chunks of time policing these guys. Would it not be quicker to cut out the middleman and get the senior editors to do the job in the first place?
3. I would accept that making spammers either pay or join as an editor will cut spam submissions. Has it made an appreciable difference. Have you, as it were, gained more on the swings than you have lost on the roundabouts?
Having said that, I would commend JoeAnt for being more Spam Free than GoGuides or DMOZ
| 7:43 am on May 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
1) yes, most do 1 submission, but there are also a lot of editors who stay. Maybe that's because we have a contest going on.
2) The number of editors who can do reviews is also growing. Teaching the editors is less work than do all the reviews and submissions yourself. We have a large number of editors from other directories, and they know what to do. Our rules are comparable with DMOZ etc.
3) Before we closed the free submission 99% of the submissions were very bad: spam or nice descriptions like 'My site is the best.', and the senior editors had to decline it or change it. Since the editors need to do something (not much) this is reduced to a small percentage, and we send the site back for editing. Almost every editor checks in again within a few days to see what happened to his/her submission.
| 10:37 am on May 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It might well be worth DMOZ keeping an eye on JoeAnt and GoGuides to see how this pans out. I've always maintained that lots of people would happily pay a small sum to get a quicker review, especially in the commercial categories.
| 3:57 pm on May 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I can't speak for what happens at GoGuides, I have only joined and submitted sites to JoeAnt. By allowing new editors to join and add sites, both the webmaster and JoeAnt win.
If senior JoeAnt editors were the only ones who could add sites, where would they find them? ODP and other directory/search engine listings would be the most likely sources. What value is there in duplicating what is already there? By allowing editors to join and add their sites the directory gets many sites that are not listed anywhere else yet.
A webmaster with a new site can spend a few minutes submitting it. Then get feedback on his/her submission from a reviewing editor. Since submissions go to any available reviewer, you are not being judged by a competitor. The reviewer has no goal other than wanting the best sites with the best descriptions placed in the most appropriate subtopics. JoeAnt gets fresh content, new sites get the notice they deserve.
| 6:39 am on May 19, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Do we get a google boost of sorts if we are listed in Go Guides or JoAnt? Or - are they just another place to be listed for bits and bats of traffic?
| 3:28 pm on Jun 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>Do we get a google boost of sorts if we are listed in Go Guides or JoAnt? Or - are they just another place to be listed for bits and bats of traffic?
Looks to me like Google spiders both. PageRank of these directories is nothing great, but every little bit helps. It is theoretically possible one of those 100+ mysterious Google algo factors is a boost is given to sites in multiple human edited directories.
| 2:27 am on Jun 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|It sounds like it will be tough to live up to their new slogan "The spam free web search"! |
The funny thing is that I just received an unsolicited e-mail from them asking me to buy ad banner space. :o Maybe I left something checked when I submitted my site or something, but sounds sort of like Spam to me.
| 6:00 pm on Jun 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
In regards to the ODP, those wanting to get into the "Vacation Rentals" sections normally do not receive that as their first topic due to the gobs of spam and affiliate submissions to go through. The categories are just too big for new editors. There are lots of other areas in need of help there that are smaller and allow new editors to gain the experience needed to take on Rec/Travel categories.
I joined GoGuides not long ago at all, and have been pretty impressed so far. It seems that most of the actions there are watched by their "Topics Committee", and I think the level of interaction with their editors, new and old, will keep the directory there as clean as possible. You could always email a GoGuides editor(s) in the topic your site "fits" and ask for your site to be reviewed to be listed, it can't hurt and it's their job to find sites to add anyways.
I tried JoeAnt also, it's really a slow, boring process. I'm used to having more creative freedom like with the ODP and GoGuides.
| 4:13 pm on Jun 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Will Googuides prove more successfull than ODP and for that matter will Google switch directories and beging in using GoGuide (spam free)?