homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.237.213.31
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 74 message thread spans 3 pages: 74 ( [1] 2 3 > >     
DMOZ categories as a link next to listings.
Been gone a while, anyone still missing them.
mack

WebmasterWorld Administrator mack us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 8:50 pm on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Does anyone miss the links to relates categories within Google serps.

Today for example I was searching for "foo widget" It was great when you saw a site with the category next to it.. that way you could be fairly certain every site within that cat was going to be on a simlar theme.

What I now use is...

[ foo widget +"dmoz" ]. At leat that way it will display the ODP category within the results.

Anyone else still missing them.

Mack.

 

Stefan

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 11:55 pm on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I miss them. It was a stamp of quality. It showed that the site had been seen by a human editor, and passed as something that might have value. (I know, everyone who has a grudge against DMOZ will disagree).

I don't know if the whole impersonal algo approach is necessarily the best way to go for organizing search on the internet. The ODP shouldn't get lost in the shuffle.

rfgdxm1

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 2:06 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

>I don't know if the whole impersonal algo approach is necessarily the best way to go for organizing search on the internet. The ODP shouldn't get lost in the shuffle.

I agree. It also basically amounted to a very good "click here to find other sites similar to this one". For example, if someone searched just "widgets", they might get on page 1 ODP listed sites selling them, and some about widget safety, and others about widget history. Good way for someone looking to buy a widget to get rid of a lot of sites they didn't care about.

flicker

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 2:55 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

The links also made it extremely easy to search within Google's copy of the directory. I know not many people did this, but it was a little-known way to get incredibly relevant results. DMOZ itself has minimal search capabilities at best, so taking advantage of the Google directory was a good way to get search access to the ODP categories.

I can still do this by going to the Google directory frontpage, but it's much more of a pain and dumps me back into the general web search after one shot. :P

Stefan

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 3:03 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

It also basically amounted to a very good "click here to find other sites similar to this one".

Yep, and it worked well.

I don't really understand why they went missing... it's hard to see what was gained.

GoogleGuy

WebmasterWorld Senior Member googleguy us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 5:58 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

We do a lot of UI experiments, so a link that takes up that much real estate needs to have a commensurate amount of clickthrough or usage by users. I haven't talked to whoever collected the data, but I suspect that the links just weren't getting as much clickthrough. Folks can still access the directory by clicking the "more >>" link on the front page though, so getting to the directory is only an extra click away. Maybe it would be possible to somehow show that a site was in the directory without taking up as much screen real estate. I'll be happy to pass something like that along as a suggestion..

Krapulator

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:20 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Or perhaps add it as a preference that can be saved for those of us who find it useful.

steveb

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:32 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Personalized search already does this. It sticks those globes next to sites in the directory.

Regular search should be able to easily add a globe after "similar pages" or even a link that says "category".

<starting black helicopter>
It's clear to me the Directory links were removed because personalized search is, at this point, redundant and meaningless if basically the same data can be found in the regular search. They had to be removed for the persoanlized search to be activated (and since the personalized search is a joke now this seems a really poor idea).
</black helicopter>

In general the Directory link was at least as useful as the similar pages link, and when a site is in the Directory, the Directory link was far more useful than the similar pages one. Google should swallow a pill and realize personalized search is nowhere close to on the horizon and return the useful link to their search real estate.

Powdork

WebmasterWorld Senior Member powdork us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:39 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Ecstatic to see them gone!:) :)
So much so i took deemozwatch offline.

jimh009

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:54 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I miss the DMOZ link VERY MUCH! Please bring it back.

I used it quite a bit. As it stands now, I have to visit a site, hope they are in DMOZ and then click on the Google Directory icon on the Google Toolbar. A couple of extra steps I would like to avoid.

I can understand the screen real estate thing, but having something - anything - listed to indicate its directory placing would be immensely helpful. The directory - despite being hated by some people on this board - is still a wonderful place to go to find new sites - especially in categories that you (as a searcher) are not familiar with.

My two cents.

Powdork

WebmasterWorld Senior Member powdork us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 2:37 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I can understand the screen real estate thing, but having something - anything - listed to indicate its directory placing would be immensely helpful.
How about a small text link similar to the cache link?
ThomasB

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 3:04 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

How about a small text link similar to the cache link?

Or just the cat-name instead of the full path.

jimh009

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 4:51 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I think just having the category name listed - not the full path - is a good idea. Perhaps have it listed next to the "cache" link?

zgb999

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 4:59 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I seldom clicked on a dmoz category link BUT I looked at it as
- sign of quality
- help to see where the site belongs to (e.g. was it in a regional category or in a subject category, what category related to the keyword...)

Sometimes I would click on it to see related sites of the same category. But almost always I would look at it as a piece of information to decide which page to click on.

GoogleGuy

WebmasterWorld Senior Member googleguy us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 5:16 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hey, I'll pass this feedback on.

flicker

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:05 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Thanks so much for listening to threads like these, GoogleGuy. (-: I'd be very happy if there were either a little text link next to the cache one, a little icon like the globe one next to directory-listed sites, or the ability for me to turn the old-style category links back on as a personalized option. Any of the three of these would improve my own search experience significantly.

IITian

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:27 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

zgb999
>I seldom clicked on a dmoz category link BUT I looked at it as
- sign of quality
- help to see where the site belongs to (e.g. was it in a regional category or in a subject category, what category related to the keyword...)

Agree. To reduce bitterness from webmasters who are not listed in DMOZ, if would be nice if Google talks to a few more reputed human-edited directories (Yahoo! ...) and for pages not in DMOZ, display link to categories in those directories with the name of the directory too showing.

On a related topic, if Google uses similar click through results to determine the relevancy of its serps, similar problems arise. I title my pages so that I count myself successful if the surfers get to look at my title and brief description, even if they don't click my page. (Alternative is to deceive the surfers by titling it differently, let them click to my page and then give them the message. At this stage I don't want to do this.)

FlwrLdy

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:42 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

This may have already been been mentioned, but I believe it bears repeating:

Some of the controversy regarding the search for the word 'jew' might have been avoided if the Directory category link to Society/Issues/Race-Ethnic-Religious_Relations/Hate/Hate_Groups/Anti-Semitic/ had appeared with that site (and any other listed hate sites in that SERP.)

Just because a link isn't clicked doesn't mean it isn't useful.

4serendipity

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 9:53 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

We do a lot of UI experiments, so a link that takes up that much real estate needs to have a commensurate amount of clickthrough or usage by users. I haven't talked to whoever collected the data, but I suspect that the links just weren't getting as much clickthrough.

Perhaps the UI was flawed, causing the poor clickthough rates?

Just because a link isn't clicked on that often doesn't mean that the information accessed via this link isn't useful or that it wouldn't be useful to those who aren't clicking on it.

Despite some people's opinions about DMOZ, most of the categories are excellent jumping off points for their particular subject. Taking away these links has reduced Google's effectiveness.

rfgdxm1

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 11:16 pm on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

>Despite some people's opinions about DMOZ, most of the categories are excellent jumping off points for their particular subject. Taking away these links has reduced Google's effectiveness.

Particularly amongst the most computer savvy people, who knew when clicking on that link made sense, and when to ignore it. These searchers may switch to a new SE if they include ODP links. It's been commented by many that Google has since early on had a lot of "geek appeal". The non-computer savvy folks tend to just do what the geeks they know use and recommend. Geeks *don't* want dumbed down Google SERPs.

IITian

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 4:24 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

I say do away with description below the title to make room for some directory link and more pages on the top fold.

It will force people to write better titles. Currently many seem to use title for algo gaming while cleverly using description meta for inviting text.

canuck

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 4:37 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

- help to see where the site belongs to

Agreed, to me seeing exactly what category a site fell into was by far the most valuable part of these cat-links. I read almost every category before I clicked the link.

Perhaps someone at G should compare click-through rates for results that showed a DMOZ cat compared to those that didn't.

Powdork

WebmasterWorld Senior Member powdork us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 4:56 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

Perhaps someone at G should compare click-through rates for results that showed a DMOZ cat compared to those that didn't.

Of course the ctr would be higher. Those listed in the Google directory received 6 lines of text whereas those without received four.
Let's face it, humans are biased.

seoArt

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 5:10 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

I'd like to put my vote in too, I liked them both because of the "stamp of quality" comment, and because the categories were a good place to find similar sites.

Kirby

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 5:41 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

When the serps suffer at times and only a few really good pages are returned, this was a natural jumping off point to more relevant results. Hope G brings it back.

Powdork

WebmasterWorld Senior Member powdork us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 5:45 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

What I think would work is:
Cached - Similar pages - Directory

added- why couldn't the similar pages link just go to the category. It's useless now as it is IMHO.

muesli

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 23660 posted 6:46 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

Just because a link isn't clicked on that often doesn't mean that the information accessed via this link isn't useful or that it wouldn't be useful to those who aren't clicking on it.

i agree very much!

i used to click on directory links only occasionally and still i think google SERPs have become a much poorer and sader place since they are gone. they were an indicator of (editorically reviewed!) quality, topical belonging, etc.

en cuanto a screen real estate i'd even go a step further and say the following SERP features are a lot less important (and i wouldn't miss them):

  • the file-size-indicator. i've been using google almost every day in the past 5 years, yet i have NEVER looked at the filesize and drawn conclusions from it. could also go into a title attribute: <a href=# title="64k">
  • the fresh stamp. probably more a marketing feature to show off how up2date google is. for me as the searcher there's no value to it as the "fresh" page can be without updates for months, despite its date stamp. (would have been useful back when SERPs used to serve stone-old data. not the case anymore at G.)
  • similar pages. the feature itself would be nice but the results are more than useless. i've never seen a related:widget result that deserved the name. i'm sure CTR will reflect this.
    as for the rest i can't complain.

    Anyone else still missing them
    very much so.

  • zeus

    WebmasterWorld Senior Member zeus us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



     
    Msg#: 23660 posted 11:19 am on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

    I miss them alot, thats for sure.

    zeus

    Mozart

    10+ Year Member



     
    Msg#: 23660 posted 1:14 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

    Google Guy,

    your message #6 has one flaw from my point of view...

    I used to do searches and may want to carry over the search to the directory/DMOZ. Used to be one click before and I would know the results. Now I need to go to "more", then to the directory and finally run the same search again. Three clicks.

    I also vote for the directory tab to be returned to us, it had a huge advantage.

    And if the "more" tab could via javascript carry over the search from the input to wherever you need it, that would be great too...

    Mozart

    canuck

    10+ Year Member



     
    Msg#: 23660 posted 1:26 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

    Canuck: Perhaps someone at G should compare click-through rates for results that showed a DMOZ cat...


    Powdork: Of course the ctr would be higher. Those listed in the Google directory received 6 lines of text whereas those without received four.

    There's many ways to evaluate the usefulness of the DMOZ cats with all the data G has. Perhaps a better indicator of its usefulness would be time spent on a site with a DMOZ cat link compared to now without. I believe the cats allowed the user to make a more informed click, thus saving time. Of course only G's data can back any of this up...

    It all comes down to searcher satisfaction, and just because people aren't clicking the DMOZ links doesn't mean they aren't useful.

    Plus, there's the whole issue of aesthetics - the SERPS just look plain boring without the DMOZ links to add a little spice...

    This 74 message thread spans 3 pages: 74 ( [1] 2 3 > >
    Global Options:
     top home search open messages active posts  
     

    Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
    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