DMOZ Survey?

Interesting entry in my logs

[willybfriendly]

This one could go here or in the Spider forum. I chose this forum for reasons that may become clear.

I note the following referrer entry in my logs

[tagword.com...]

Checking it out, it appears that there is an independent analysis of DMOZ taking place.

due to multiple people informing us that this data is highly unreliable, very prone to error and "collapsing under it's own weight", we decided to test it and see

What are the results so far?

only 84% 'good' with 57,000 editors? With large search engines using this data I am surprised with 16% error standard. This also does not take into account "update your bookmark" pages and others. The actual amount of true sites is at a current 75% estimate with the highest at 80%.

Anybody else run across this one? How much credibality should we give it?

WBF

[takagi]

See also the thread: Dead Links in DMOZ - Didn't they have a robot to check them? [webmasterworld.com] with a link to the same page at message 7.

[rfgdxm1]

One thing that should be noted is that 57,000 editor number is the number of editors that have ever been with the ODP. Including those that are long gone. I can't remember the exact number, but some meta posted the current number of editors, and it was like a third of that. And of the active editors, the vast majority can only edit in very limited areas of the ODP.

It also depends on what the user considers useful. If I am searching for websites about the Beatles, if 1 out of 5 listed in a category are dead that isn't that bad. Particularly if with the ODP I can find sites about the Beatles I otherwise wouldn't.

[claus]

See this thread:

[webmasterworld.com...]

It's apparently a logfile spammer.

/claus

[willybfriendly]

Thanks takagi, I missed that thread. Interesting stuff.

I was always taught that I could learn and improve from criticism. Seems like many DMOZ editors want only to refute criticism, even if it is backed up with some level of fact. Not a good sign...

(This comment was not intended to disparage the hard work that DMOZ editors perform - only to suggest that an eye to improvement will be sharper if one listens to "customer" feedback.)

WBF

[takagi]

I think rfgdxm1 was refering to the thread Open Directory Project - A Mystery [webmasterworld.com] in which a meta editor wrote "As of June 12th, there appear to be 9510 active editors."

[rfgdxm1]

Thanks tagaki. If you read down farther in that thread:

"Actually, I goofed. The amount of people who've made at least 1 edit in the past nine months is 11547. The number of people making 5 edits over the past year is well over 10,000 (I don't have access to that precise statistic)."

This means that of the 57,822 editors listed on the home page, only 20% are currently around and active.

[synergy]

Seems like many DMOZ editors want only to refute criticism, even if it is backed up with some level of fact.

Fact is fact. However when 95% of the criticism an editor receives is that of a negative and/or threatning nature based on topics that the editor has no control of, you start to refute the comments. Who wouldn't? :)