Forum Moderators: open
1)Google likes sites that appear in ODP and usually gives them a PR boost which, in most cases, means a higher ranking position in Google searches.
2) Yahoo! site search now uses Googles results, so by association, Yahoo! is also rewarding sites for their ODP connection. Yahoo traffic is now expected to come mostly from these search results with the change in emphasis away from its directories.
If that holds true then Google and Yahoo!, these 2 giants of web information delivery, are linking the integrity of their "best" search results to an undermanned organisation of volunteer editors, already faced with a backlog of editing that many see as being insurmountabe.
If the $299 for a Yahoo! review is now hugely less attractive for the majority, are we going to see a rush of submissions to ODP to try for that all important PR boost? Are the ODP editors now going to be hit with an avalance of submissions that will make everything to date seem insignificant?
If I am trying to get my client's site (ie investment) the best exposure in Google and Yahoo!, but that is dependant on the vagaries and availablity of an ODP editor... then the authority delivered into the hands of these of these volunteer editors becomes quite amazing.
1)Google likes sites that appear in ODP and usually gives them a PR boost which, in most cases, means a higher ranking position in Google searches.no more boost than any other link -- with the exception that the link anchor text is further supported by a fixed description and an associated hierarchy structure plus your own page title and description. In Yahoo results the category hierarchy is not there - will this change anything?
2) Yahoo! site search now uses Googles results, so by association, Yahoo! is also rewarding sites for their ODP connection. Yahoo traffic is now expected to come mostly from these search results with the change in emphasis away from its directories.Just a thought but maybe a strategic move -- Yahoo has been losing traffic to Google which means their directory listings were already "less effective". By planting these listings in google results directly may provide some return of Yahoo loyalty. In addition, the old Yahoo search you did have the ability to bypass Yahoo sites and go directly to google results and this is no longer the case.
If the $299 for a Yahoo! review is now hugely less attractive for the majority, are we going to see a rush of submissions to ODP to try for that all important PR boost? Are the ODP editors now going to be hit with an avalance of submissions that will make everything to date seem insignificant?The reverse could also be true. When the transfer occurred -- on a highly competitive phrase I went from nowhere in Yahoo to ranked 20 (first page). Adding a yahoo listing on this (now) should boost the listing up a few. (noting that almost all of 1 - 19 have the directory listing). I did bypass one wack of previous Yahoo web sites that had Yahooeyes before mine.
If I am trying to get my client's site (ie investment) the best exposure in Google and Yahoo!, but that is dependant on the vagaries and availablity of an ODP editor... then the authority delivered into the hands of these of these volunteer editors becomes quite amazing.True... but everyone else is in the same boat so the waiting and wanting process is equal across the board (your client and competitiors).
[edited by: fathom at 8:06 am (utc) on Oct. 11, 2002]
Google likes sites that appear in ODPPersonally I don't really agree with this and think that the benefits of an ODP listing is the same as any other site - only ODP is cache by Google as well hence you might get it double counted. An ODP listing of course get you traffic from surfers using their data.
If I am trying to get my client's site (ie investment).. the best exposure in Google and Yahoo!, but that is dependant on the vagaries and availablity of an ODP editor... then the authority .. of these of these volunteer editors becomes quite amazing.
Look on the bright side - if that were true (unlikely, see above), wouldn't it make life easier - one guideline-compliant submission and you have a happy client - you will have saved time, cash, and unlimited tinkering with multiple websites.
The authority of careful submitters would be equally amazing. And wouldn't life be so much simpler :)
If that holds true then Google and Yahoo!, these 2 giants of web information delivery, are linking the integrity of their "best" search results to an undermanned organisation of volunteer editors, already faced with a backlog of editing that many see as being insurmountabe.
I too believe that statement to be true.... on the other hand all of the 50 or so sites that I have submitted to DMOZ have been (eventually) accepted, and several have 10 or more deep links. I am not an editor, nor do I have any friends or relations that are editors.
Where a problem has occured, it has usually been due to a "problem" editor. An afternoon of checking out that editor and the category can usually give you enough substantive information to "make a case" to a meta. Its not something that submitters may feel that they should be doing, but it is effective!
Editorship at DMOZ is leasehold not freehold.
Given a good case, they will remove bad editors (well most of the time)
Editorship at DMOZ is leasehold not freehold.
I would hope that where the editor was not removed, it was because of editor confusion / genuine error (it does happen!) ... "bad" editors should not be given a second chance. :(
