Forum Moderators: open
Its been 4 months and my site still is not listed in Dmoz. Does anybody know why?
I even decided to put in an application as an editor but I can't get the email to go through. I tried sending it to the email dmoz gave me which was apply@aol.net.
Then I was told that there is a bug in their system and the correct email address is apply@dmoz.org, and that came back as not found too.
Can anybody help me figure this out? Thanks!
The point about sites not being reviewed is also well taken. But what would you have them do? Appoint editors that were not appropriate? I'd rather they didn't do that and kept the quality, even if it meant long waits.
The thing to remember as well is that there are scores of people working very very hard, for no personal gain on there. That's what winds me up in particular when I see the slanderous messages on here.
And of course, the abuse offers nothing positive to anyone.
I'd rather they didn't do that and kept the quality, even if it meant long waits.
I understand and respect that, I've just had issues with where the line is drawn between productivity and quality. Obviously, it has to be drawn somehwere. It's really just a matter of different perspectives/desires and I realize it's a decision for DMOZ to make, not me.
Yes I have used the DMOZ support forum. Yes I do know what the general atitude to affiliate marketing and SEO is from DMOZ editors - have witnessed it daily reading the forum. They consider SEO as the "bastardisation" of the internet, serving up irrelevant content to needy surfers.
Do we have to cowtow to the belief that non-inclusion is purely down to an excessive workload and non relevant sites? No! Yes they volunteered, but if they can't keep up with submissions they should relinquish their role.
Yes Dmoz does have to play a part in seo be it PR, anchor text, authoratitive link etc, but we should not expect that all Dmoz editors act in accordance with the rules. As there was so much to gain from a listing and multiple listings at that we can surely expect some to abuse the system! That may be relevant to the initial question from JoeHouse, it may be relevant to his site, it may not. But that does not mean it is not relevant to any site!
Ultimately the internet is created by humans and as such reasons why a site plays a particlular role in the internet (be it DMOZ or a users site) all comes down to human decisions, decisions of ODP editors, decisions made by those at Google, decisions made by webmasters. If we are not allowed to make comments about human choices as it affects the internet as a whole then our understanding of the internet will be severly diminished.
The internet is not just silicon and connections, at its core is flesh, bone and personality. If we remove that from our debate we may as well not comminicate and this forum will become a bland mix of scientists and academics. Something I personaly don't want - I want a balance of formula and opinion.
The history of science has been a balance of this mixture, ignoring that will mean that our conjectures will be less refined.
I also agree that lots of the best editors post on here and probably don't have much to do with the categories that do have the problems.
I don't like this phrase "ODP bashing" , I am trying to give constructive criticism here with good reasons and trying to have an adult conversation.
One thing I do disagree on is that where a category has no editor and never has then an editor should be appointed, whether they meet ODP's rigorous selection procedure or not, otherwise that category is just left to die.
I find it amazing that in my industry there is no editor for the category, only 4 sites listed, the biggest brand names and best sites in the country are nowhere to be seen yet I know several good, hard working people that have applied to be editor.
Surely alarm bells must be ringing?
As i said, i'm not ODP basking, just providing some useful feedback which ODP may find useful.
Oh and Claus, thanks for the welcome :) however i don't think i'll be sticking around here, there are several other forums that are slightly more balanced and grown-up.
Sorry was not around to answer you before.
"you're just playing an old record again and again and again."
First time I have posted about ODP. Seems you have a record that jumps there mate.
"How many posts have we heard whining that they can't get into the ODP?"
1) You seem to be the one that is whining and winging
2) I was actually referring to;
a) The main (non profit) site for terrorist victims
b) Three airlines that ODP seem to think do not, or should not exist.
c) A charity run by a guy who gave up making money from his villas and turned them into children's homes.
None of which are my sites.
On the flip side, I was also referring to Spam complaints made to ODP's chief about;
1) Small businesses that have 5 listings for the same page.
2) A business that got into the vegetarian section after throwing up a page with three vegetarian recipes (while the authoritive site on vegetarian recipes gets ignored)
3) A single doorway page for the owner's real sites that made the index.
All of which, of course, he then tried to substantiate by saying I was only interested in promoting my sites (which I had already pointed out I owned one non-profit for the subject matter).
I also have emails from ODP editors who are either openly or clearly otherwise disgusted. Including an email from editor who reported that the peer editor for a whole swathe of ODP does not accept sub category editors and has not reviewed a submission for 14 months (don't heckle, I have the email). With thousand (actually, they gave me the precise number) of site submissions simply ignored.
You know, I think dmoz is like communism. Great on paper (all that equality and all) but does not work (as the people in charge all act on their selfish needs or untenable senses of pride). I have to congratulate Yahoo and Looksmart by comparison for using professional (paid) staff to review sites, but where they do accept "not for profit sites" into their indexes for free. And I also have to say, Yahoo and Looksmart / Zeal as directories knock the spots off dmoz for content. They also have servers that work.
As it happens, I love the concept of dmoz. I just think it has an almighty political cancer within it.
Then take another look at your first post.
>>... of self-servicing, nepotistic attitudes of DMOZ editors <<
Just the sort of inaccurate garbage that most of us don't want on here.
The bottom line is that the ODP is the highest quality directory there is. Hardly anyone would disagree with that (except perhaps those still bouncing with resentment at rejection).
There are issues, as there always will be, but slagging off the whole directory because of them is ludicrous and by now very boring.
The problem is that it is impossible to discuss specific issues, without the ODP bashing brigade jumping in with subjective wide-ranging abuse.
It's a shame.
>> Just the sort of inaccurate garbage that most of us don't want on here. <<
would you like me to make the same comment but with different words?
>> The bottom line is that the ODP is the highest quality directory there is. <<
I, and many others would disagree.
>> There are issues, as there always will be, but slagging off the whole directory because of them is ludicrous and by now very boring. <<
I wasn't - only commenting on a proportion of the editors. And I don't call that "slagging off" I call it a criticism. How can people make criticism non-annoying? Because I beliefs are different to yours - don't dismiss them out of hand. Just because we critise, don't demonise. Critising and evaluating an entity is the first step of understanding it. If scientists never questioned or reviewed something many of the inventions we take for granted wouldn't exist. Ohh that apple hit my head. Two choices: "£$^"$%^ing apple" or "why did that happen?". You're mistaking the later for the former.
Were are not abusing the ODP, we're having an open assesment of it. GrinnonGordon has fact, just because it doesn't match your OPINION then you shouldn't just describe it as "bashing". Being open to possibilities is the first step of understanding them.
I would question your source - an editor will time out after 4 months if they don't make an edit. That would make me question the rest of your source's allegations and assumptions. Often someone purporting to be "in the know", is reporting the usual urban myths about the ODP. Those who do know what is going on will usually stick to our guidelines about not divulging internal discussions.
Nothing will stop the short sighted believing it is crap just because it doesn't serve them personally. It's quite sad really.
Marcia... you're wasting your time trying to direct this onto something positive, as I have. I'd close it if I was you. Maybe like the Google forum, anything of the ODP should be pre-moderated.
one listing in DMOZ actually equals a whole lot of backlinks at one time. Given that G calculate PR based on backlinks, this should illustrate the importance (Thread topic).
There is a whole lot of just-another-waste-of-time-post. Noise in the posts in WW is really getting unbearable. Sad but True. People here love posting, posting and whining and posting.... Honestly, i learnt nothing in all the other 30-ish posts on this topic here.
<edit> 3 posts in a couple of minutes that i wrote this one. Shame! </edit>
[edited by: Chndru at 2:13 pm (utc) on July 24, 2003]
Heh! What a DMOZ thread gone bad?!? Imagine that! I am shocked, shocked, I tell you. (Actually, I didn't read more than the above few posts --I was just responding the the title.)
>Why is DMOZ so Important to Google regarding ranking?
It isn't. I haven't submitted anything to ODP in 3 years.
>> has not reviewed a submission for 14 months <<
that was not from the same source as the other comments - did you read my post clearly? That was from a different source.
If you have a single bad word to say about dmoz then you're a bad man and you're unlikely to be heard because anyone affiliated with DMOZ will have their fingers in their ears and be singling "LA LA LA LA LA"
If i said "dmoz is crap" that would certainly be negative
If people give constructive criticism and try to help dmoz by making suggestions for improvements I would say that is VERY positive.
I have a feeling that what is meant by "positive" is that every thread shouls just go on about how great DMOZ is and how we should all worship the editors.
Sad, very sad.
[edited by: skibum at 3:02 pm (utc) on July 24, 2003]
[edit reason] edited to focus on debate and not on individual members [/edit]
Why is DMOZ so Important to Google regarding ranking?
For Google's scoring in particular, right now for us it primarily means having links that confer Page Rank from two sources. From DMOZ itself, and from the Google Directory.
However,
A link on ODP is no better nor worse than a link on any other page of the same PR shared by the same number of links and using the same link text.
You'll also find that most categories deep in the structure have low PR, and as far as data users, because of the cumbersome nature of the database, small and low-PR sites scraping narrow (and therefore usually small) categories are the order of the day, rather than the Wall Street Journal planting the Business branch on its home page.
If you disagree, take your complaint about Google's use of ODP to Google. There is no special relationship; ODP became "big" because of Lycos-- before Google existed. And Google for its part has not gotten to its position through myopia and stupidity, particularly with regards to their name. If the ODP really becomes such a monstrosity, they certainly will not hesitate to replace it with something better (on a sliding scale including better quality links, better quality content and structure, bigger quantity of links, and lower cost. Try and find one).
And as far as the hardware problems, you need to lodge your complaint with AOL. One share of AOL costs less than a dinner entree, including commission, and it gives you the right to denounce whomever you please at the shareholder meeting.
On numerous occasions, various WebmasterWorld members who are also active with the ODP (and covering a range of experience there) have carefully explained the history and principles of the project, the process and criteria for category appointments, the guidelines for inclusion and presentation of listings, the avenues and mechanisms for reporting suspected abuse, the internal culture and operations, the ongoing problems and possible solutions for management, and steps which end users, site developers, site owners, marketeers/SEOs, and data licensees can take to improve the quality as well as quantity of listings.
Yet every other post on this board is insistent that one and one equals three, and therefore ODP is beyond redemption.
If statements like this:
Sorry, but the main reason sites do not get listed in DMOZ is because the editors server their own interests and egos first, the Internet second.
have merit in individual cases, they should be taken up with ODP, not here. We're not here to insult everyone who volunteers their time at ODP, not are we here to insult each other.
Nothing more to see here. :)
