Forum Moderators: open
Both submited without a hickup, used Netscape.
Just wanted to let peeps know to get in there and submit NOW!
I've got another site that needs submitting but it's not quite ready yet - not incomplete, just not enough up yet as there should be. I think maybe it's worth taking a chance while it's working now.
[edited by: Marcia at 6:30 am (utc) on Sep. 30, 2003]
I once hit an $85 jackpot on a nickel slot machine in Las Vegas, the bell went off and I stood there jumping up and down yelling "Wow! I don't even gamble, I can't believe it!" The pit boss came over with the money and said "Lady, I hate to tell you this, but... if you don't gamble then exactly what do you think you were you doing?"
Ka-ching!
It may be the middle of the night in the US, it may be the end of the month, it maybe that only 3 people are trying to access it at one time.....but YES, YES, YES it is actually working at this point in time.
Dang....need to book a flight to Vegas immediately...I must be on a roll!
How long did it take 'em to sort out a simple server error? 10 days? Well I guess that isn't bad considering they are a cornerstone (or is it tombstone) of the web!
Have been trying to submit a number of sites for so long now I'd forgotten about it. Gone thru now. Thanks for the heads up.
2odd...
Normaly I wait about 30 seconds for a timeout or a 404. Today I just waited about 5 seconds and get the submision received page. Long may it last.
Mack.
I can confirm my submission just went through as well.
How long did it take 'em to sort out a simple server error?
I'm not certain why everyone thinks this was a simple server error. During that 10 day period, I counted at least 4 different issues that were effecting the submission process. During that period, there was also a security issue with ssh, and a hurricane in an area where part of the ops team for AOL/Netscape is.
The big problem has been getting the submission process to work over a multiple server system--that is, submissions are made from one of three public servers and then have to be sent to the password protected editor server. There seem to have been many little adjustments that made a difference, including blocking many bots and screen scraping programs that were using too many resources.
The final thing to fix it appears to have been a complete re-write of the submission scripts. So I'd have to call it a bit more than a "simple server error".
The good news is, the fix this time seems to be holding up; hopefully that will continue to be the case even when the normal amount of submission traffic resumes.
I'm not certain why everyone thinks this was a simple server error.
Agreed. These guys sure do throw a lot of stones in the glass house, don't they?
I dare you guys to say that you _never_ have technical glitches (or worse) screwing up your site(s) or the hosting of the site(s). Heck, I dare you to say that your spam filter never tries to kill off legitimate email.
I always wonder why the vitriol is directed at the ODP, but no-one comments on Google and what they aren't doing?
>tongue-in-cheek<
You didn't quite hit the jackpot yet... Maybe a more apt analogy would be after hanging around the casino for hours a blue-haired granny finally left her slot machine stool, giving you a chance to try your luck. ;)
The ODP 'add url' form is temporarily disabled while we run statistics to track down some performance issues. It should be back on Wednesday, October 1, at 2pm PDT.
They should "temporarily disable" it indefinitely until they catch up with the backlog of submissions.
EW
>They should "temporarily disable" it indefinitely until they catch up with the backlog of submissions.
Are they tracking down the performance issues associated with the servers or editors?
>I'm not certain why everyone thinks this was a simple server error. During that 10 day period, I counted at least 4 different issues that were effecting the submission process. During that period, there was also a security issue with ssh, and a hurricane in an area where part of the ops team for AOL/Netscape is.
I wasn't actually referring to the submission process, I was referring to dmoz.org not being available 70% of the time to the public at all! The submission process as stated by others here hasn't worked correctly for months.
The security issue with ssh I assume you are referring to is the Buffer Management Vulnerability in OpenSSH, [openssh.com...] it took our techs less than 10 minutes to install the patches on our dedicated non managed servers once released by RH. On our managed servers Rackspace had it done within 30 minutes of making the request.
WGT the hurricane, we are based in Florida....we know a thing or two about Hurricanes.....maybe half a day lost if it is a real serious threat so folks can go home and board up their windows and be with their families.
Almost every Linux server on the planet suffered from the potential ssh vulnerability....are you really telling us that no one else was down at all but the OPD suffered badly?....if so you are telling us the OPD has a big problem in the technical support area....and thanks for confirming that.
I understand that OPD editors are passionate about defending it, but the reality is that if they want to keep the thing alive it should be run in a professional technical environment, properly funded and managed by folks who truly consider it an important entity that must be up and running inline with its peers.
Most of the problems are not with the editors, they are with the owners (AOL) who have put it out to pasture like a race horse that has seen better days.
Defending its problems will not fix them. Getting the people who fund it to sit up and listen would be a better start.
The ODP will continue as a community website whatever happens.....the question is how much respect will it have from other web properties if it is incapable of functioning on a basic technical level.
I'm not the least bit surprised Google isn't updating from it, they must be seeing its relevance decrease all the time.....which is a pity for the editors, the public and most likely for Google.
</endrant>
I'm not the least bit surprised Google isn't updating from it, they must be seeing its relevance decrease all the time.....
The problem with this argument is that Google is actually running a directory now suffering far more from link rot and relevance issues than the ODP.
Either they should update the directory or drop the Google Directory entirely, but keeping an out of date version when a much better version is available makes no sense.
It would make sense if they had stats to say only a tiny percentage of visitors currently look at the directory. It would also make sense if they were already looking to replace it, but hadn't yet finalized the alternative.
I think the Google folks are fairly smart, I don't think they will want to waste time on trying to make something up-to-date that they have no long term commitment to.
Looking at my logs I see very few referrals from the Google directory or dmoz.org.....even though the PR's for sites rank them at the top. Suggests to me most people simply don't go there....in which case why should Google lose sleep over it?
I think in a few years from now we will see more PFI directories with higher quality. The free Internet is a dieing concept.....If L$ hadn't been such an a$$ maybe it could have lead the field already!
Actually it is the other way around, particularly when it comes to anything having to do with search. I can't believe anyone can seriously think pfi has a meaningful future.
From Google Technology page:
"A Google search is an easy, honest and objective way to find high-quality websites with information relevant to your search."
Maybe that should read "and out of date directory listing" together with "Our directory listings may not contain high-quality relevant results from websites launched during the last year due to slow processing of submissions"
EW
I just finished sorting the unreviewed queues in all 12 of my categories while submissions were down last week. At least one-quarter of them were already listed and/or waiting in more than one unreviewed queue because somebody had submitted it to multiple places. One-quarter of them were sites that had gone 404 and were moved to unreviewed by other editors to see if they would relocate or return to functionality in the future, and another one-quarter had been sent to my categories by other editors. Of the rest, many were spam: mirrors, inappropriate deeplinks, or affiliate sites submitted in violation of the rules.
Whenever you see a number listed for how many URLs are unreviewed in DMOZ, you should keep in mind that the great majority of those are -not- actually valid submissions from outside the ODP.
Anyway, the submissions are definitely rolling in again now, and with the unreviewed queues cleared out from last week, there's probably never been a better time to submit. Especially if you do it once and to the most appropriate category, which would then keep it from clogging all up again. :-)
it took our techs less than 10 minutes to install the patches on our dedicated non managed servers once released by RH.
Two questions:
1. How many servers did your techs have to update?
2. How many servers do you think AOL/Netscape has to update?
Yes, ODP is lower on the list of servers that get tech support. No reason it should be any higher, as the problems with access to the public side and public submissions are not even considered to be a top priority by most ODP editors. Problems with the editor side of things at ODP generally get much higher priorities and are fixed a lot faster.
The submission process as stated by others here hasn't worked correctly for months.
That is incorrect. Only for about ten days was the number of submissions down by a significant percentage.
Near the end of last year, the single server ODP was on could no longer handle what it was being asked to do (the original designers set the goal of having 1 million listed sites and about a 1000 editors--several years later we are just about to pass 4 million sites and we have nearly 10,000 active editors).
The process of upgrading began, but it took awhile, in part because the system wasn't designed for more than one server, and we were going to a system with quite a few more. A few of the processes didn't actually work on the new system in practice, so other processes were used, which in turn had an adverse effect on submissions. The problem was not one problem but the cumulative effect of many problems, some of which hid still more problems.
Obviously, our single programmer has been working hard on solving these final problems, and everything appears to be running quite smoothly (knock on wood).
I appreciate constructive criticism. We (editors) have even formed and proposed changes that would benefit the ODP that were inspired by such criticism in outside forums. But it's always a good thing to have all the facts, as opposed to assumptions, when criticizing.
And complaining about the amount of tech and financial support the ODP gets is a waste of time. What we have is the way it is; it's time to learn to live with it.
Too early for a beer?
FWIW: I also successfully submitted a site after i found this thread. Allthough it worked and i received the valid standard response page in noticed that the url is still somehow buggy:
http*://dmoz.org/cgi-bin//add.cgi (<- notice the double slash).
No, no, no, time for a toast. She ain't broke!
I posted here (msg #2)at about 11:30 PM my time on the 29th, almost the 30th, that I had just submitted after a 404 (on the 25th). I picked a category one lower than I could have with a minor adjustment, got the submission accepted screen, gave no further thought.
I was looking for something else yesterday, took a minute to take a peek, and there it sat, added on the 30th.
Title submitted was site title, description minimal, about 10-11 words. The editor rewrote and added a few words that made it more accurately descriptive - right on, actually. Mine was stingy.
Less than 24 hours and the site was in!
I believe it was bad submission code as I tried to validate the submission page on W3G and it failed big time. It was shortly after I posted 3 messages about this in WWforums that ODP finally started working again. If they saw my posts, fine. If not, I don't care. I only care that I finally got 4 of my sites submitted after trying for months at wee hours of the morn-Pacific time.
