Forum Moderators: open
I am on the brink of tears today, as I am so frustrated with ODP! I have tried for 3-4 months to get several pages listed and the editors, acccording to my logs, have only vistited once and then rejected that listing.
My site has pages of great content with only a few advertiser links and I'm listed several times in zeal and yahoo and just can't make it into ODP. At first I thought the editors were too busy, so I applied to be an editor for one of the categories. Then, I received a prompt rejection for the editor position from the SAME editor that I submitted my main site to (the same editor that hadn't reviewed my site in over 3 months)! I don't know how they pick their editors but it seems like they must do so in a very tainted and random way. (I have worked professionally in the category I applied for, I was an editor at zeal, and I have worked for an internet company for over 2 years.)
Anyway, my point here, is that it seems like the editors are keeping out quality sites because either 1) they are competitors or 2) because they are lazy and never review the submitted sites. If this is the case, then why don't they accept more editors or resign their positions. It seems to me that by accepting the job as an editor, that it is their duty to review and respond to the sites submitted to their category, and to do so in a somewhat prompt manner (no longer than a month).
The real problem here is that no one is managing the editors. Most editors are web site owners with their own agenda and don't seem very dedicated to helping make the ODP directory a comprehensive source of quality sites. I'd like to report the abuse to someone, but there is really no way to prove that a particular editor is being abusive. Especially when we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes after we submit our site.
If you're still reading, thanks for listening, as I really needed to vent my frustrations.
If you read this forum regularly - which you do - you know that people are willing to help, but badmouthing at random will make you few friends. If your claims were true, ODP would have collapsed by now.
There are ways to report editor abuse - if that's what this is - but I suspect you need to get yourself in order first.
It seems a little short sighted to complain about the quality of editors ... then ask for ODP to drop its acceptance standards.
Cool off, then come back and tell us the real problem - Oh, and do put your site's URL in your profile, so we can make up our own minds on why you've not been listed, and maybe assist you.
Many people who have had dealings with dmoz.org (Netscape/AOL) have run into unconscientious editors. I myself once had to wait 6 months just to have a URL updated. It was only updated when I found a conscientious editor to help me.
What percent of ODP editors are unconscientious? Who knows? Where there is anonymity, there is also unaccountability. But we can say the same about the Yahoo! and Looksmart catalogs.
And, indeed, who writes the algorithms for Google, Inktomi, Fast, etc.? Who knows? A lot that concerns the fate of our Web sites is out of our hands.
Just keep trying different strategies. That's all you can do. Good luck. And I did not find anything in your post insulting.
My suggestion would be to post your comments at the ODP Public Forum [resource-zone.com], you should be able to address the issue there.
Stay cool, try resource-zone.com for specific issues.
The title of the post has been changed.
<added>
People are far better venting in words than in other ways (yelling at the kids, kicking the dog, for example). When people are upset, you have to be tolerant of their hyperbolies. (Did I spell that right?)
</added>
If you found nothing insulting, it's because his insults were not aimed at you. He was targeting editors; if it's spammers who need insulting - I'll take care of that :)
<added>
Sorry. That was my vent.
</added>
What a great idea; they could have international conventions and quote endlessly from Monty Python ...
They could have a big round table and pass notes endlessly round in circles ...
I suppose they can meet almost anywhere now, but when our governments get their act together (as if!), the meetings will have to move to Eastern Europe ... and when they tighten up, it'll be China.
So the average Guild Spammer is bound to get a World Tour.
I'm almost tempted ... but not quite. I think I'd prefer random insults from anonymous trolls. ;)
Not a big fan of the vent, never seen one improve the chance of a listing yet.
This site is "News and discussion for the independent web professional", the question that should be being asked is, imho, "what are the effective stratagies for a speedy listing at DMOZ".
From the WebmasterWorld Terms of Service [webmasterworld.com]:
This forum system is not a venue for personal or private vendettas. Keep your personal business as just that - personal. This forum is not a venue for personal disputes.
There is also mention in the Terms of Service of treating others with respect, as we'd like to be treated. And that includes the many respected ODP editors who are members here, whose membership and participation is much appreciated.
>The title of the post has been changed.
That is why I changed the title. Out of respect for the ODP editors, as well as out of respect and consideration for the original poster.
People often express themselves in ways they'd prefer they didn't after the fact, when they've cooled down, and it's often too late. Especially when there's a situation that tends to be frustrating and aggravating.
It's a lot better to smooth ruffled feathers, then when things cool down things can be discussed rationally and problems can be solved, with everyone remaining congenial.
Note: hyperboles
[edited by: Marcia at 7:24 pm (utc) on Aug. 1, 2002]
An editor applies for a category that interests them. That application is reviewed by other editors and "somewhat" randomly accepted or rejected. If it's accepted, it's noteworthy that the application could be a complete lie and it could be hiding conflicts of interest. Also, there is no interview, follow up questions or verification of the applying editor. It could be a 12 year old junior high schooler applying and editing the submissions.
When an editor application is rejected, it could very well be rejected for good reasons, but in at least some cases there is no apparent reason other than to dispell a competitor or some other bad faith reason (I'm not saying that is the case very often, but it does happen according to many posts I've found in this forum).
My point is that, there are so many categories and so little regulation of the editors, that there are rampant abuses and inconsistencies in the system. Also, each submission is treated differently and it is therefore impossible to tell why or why not your listing makes it into the directory. There is no feedback from most editors and if you look at one category versus the next, the difference in quality levels of the sites listed varies by night and day.
These abuses and inconsistencies (by even only a few of the thousands of editors), cause many people to have to research, study and sometimes even scheme ways to try to get listed. It just shouldn't be that difficult to get listed if you have a good site!
Again, thanks for all of your replies!
Isn't it at all possible that the loud complaints about the ODP are precisely because it does have a consistent set of rules that the editors, by and large, stick to? The "general submitting public" have different standards and goals from the ODP, as well as from each other. Therefore what is one man's lovingly crafted site full of independent and interesting content might be another's affiliate junk.
I sympathise with your initial post having been through most of the factual experiences that you describe (although not drawing the same conclusions). It is frustrating to hang for months when you feel that you have a site that would be of benefit. It is infuriating to be ignored when you have professional editing experience.
However I must say that with all of the disputed directory rejections where it has been possible to see the site in question, as a consumer, I have been in absolute agreement with the decision to reject it - and this gives me confidence in the activities of the ODP to put against the lack of confidence caused by the inactivity in outdated, confused or corrupt categories.
I can see your argument and it makes sense. Before today I might of agreed with you but as of today my attitude towards ODP has changed until I personally come in contact with at least one responsive editor (in one of the categories I'm interested in).
After all, when deciding how to buid a site, I specifically targeted content that would fit well with the categories of ODP. 100 hours of work later, it seems all for nothing.
The bulk of directory management is conducted by meta-editors, a self-selecting group of the senior volunteer editors, some of whom have been with the ODP since its founding. It has the usual strengths and weaknesses of any group charged with management of a wide group of volunteers (of mixed motivations) speaking many different languages and having very different ideas about what constitutes the ideal directory, and besides working in a largely anonymous online environment. Read the Meta Guidelines [dmoz.org], which is slightly out of date but should give you a good overview over what meta-editors do and how they do it. Originally there were only 6 metas, but that number has expanded considerably to cover the many languages, subject specialties, and management task specialties with greater quality and alacrity.
As for the addition or deletion of submissions, you can also find the complete Editor Guidlines [dmoz.org] publicly available.
I had originally penned a very long and detailed response, afterwards concluded that the extraordinary naivete and/or corruption you attribute to the editing and meta-editing community could only come from unawareness of how the directory is actually managed. I encourage you to read the documents I have cited.
[edited for a misspelling :o]
[edited by: choster at 9:34 pm (utc) on Aug. 1, 2002]
Actually I don't like to see these types of threads as I believe the ODP is the only true Directory out there. And with its recent W3C validation efforts, well, what more can I say...
Individual instances of ODP frustration are always going to arise. There are more direct methods to get issues like this resolved and that is go above someones head. I believe the recently launched OPD Public Forum is another great place to resolve issues such as this.
[edited by: pageoneresults at 9:00 pm (utc) on Aug. 1, 2002]
I understand your frustration believe me. The funny thing is I am an editor in ODP and any sites that I submit to any category has to wait just like anyone else. The categories for the most part are swamped, so you would think that editors would be pushed through door very easily. Thing is the ODP is very picky about their editors for the most part, they have to be. Any time you use volunteers for a project like this you have to have a high set of standards.
You stated that you believe there is almost no regulation. I beg to differ. There is a LOT of regulation. I'm not saying every single editor follows them to the letter but there is nearly always an editor in the category above the one you are trying to get listed in to ask if they can help you as you seem to be having problems with the category editor. Be polite and concise and keep moving up the ladder until you find someone to help you.
Do go to resource-zone.com for help if you need further assistance. If you want more input from people here either post your site url in your profile or sticky mail it to someone so that we can give you a more accurate reason for why you might have been rejected. Knowing the category would be helpful as well. I'd keep that info to sticky mail as well.
Not sure if what I've said will help. I do not defend the actions of every editor in the ODP, but I do know that it is indeed a huge job and sometimes sites fall through the cracks. I think it's probably that way in any large organization.
I don't call that a better system, I call it a better way to fake the system.
ODP is self-regulating. There's a section about this at [dmoz.org...]
I edit in both, the amount of submissions I get in Zeal out of 7 Categories only compares to one Cat in the ODP.
Zeal is for NON commercial sites only, and is (AFAIAC) not as well known, so when you submit a site the chances are it will get listed and listed quickly.
When it comes to the ODP there are hundreds, sometimes thousands of submissions waiting to be seen for some of the Cats, especially ecomm cats. Yes, I agree, there are some dodgy editors but there is always someone *above* them who you can report abuse to.
What would *you* do if you had 1500 submissions (most of them spam/unsuitable) waiting in a category that you were responsible for ?
Would you think "oh ok, I will take a week off work to deal with this" or would you do as much as you could when you had the time ?
ODP Editors are unpaid volunteers and the majority of them take pride in their categories.
Dazz
The category shows that there is no editor. Did I just cause myself delays? How do I straighten this out and not cause an editor undue stress?
Also, we are listed in 2 categories. From ODP site submission form:
Do not submit an URL that contains only the same or similar content as other sites you may have listed in the directory. Multiple submissions of the same or related sites may result in the exclusion and/or deletion of those and all affiliated sites.
When I discovered the ODP, we were already listed in both categories. I only went in and applied to change them. Is this ok?
any help would be appreciated....
gbgman
It's pretty pathetic but I realize there are good and bad ones. I just get stuck with the bad ones and have to give up eventually.
