Forum Moderators: open
I know ODP was heavily influenced from the beginning by volunteer editors eager to place their own sites but it seemed these inexperienced and eager people just added to the excitement. It seems now the sway of the top level editors has changed the entire character of this once dynamic project. This has held true in commercial categories I followed. My own self interest caused me to join, leave and now disregard this once important directory.
I don't think ODP can continue in any importance without significant COMMERCIAL categories and the spamming involved certainly makes them insignificant. Google's emphasis on this directory is still strong, attracting and creating opportunity for ever newer spamming techniques to ODP and I wonder, when Google casts it aside, if it will soon die.
I didnt make the stew and I dont have to sit in it...
Oh ... but you did make the stew! You started making claims that you have yet to back up.
Show us some actual facts and then many of us might be less likely to count you among those who just like to stir the pot but don't want to contribute anything of value. Flaming the ODP is not a new tradition around here ... but it does get rather tiresome when there is no meat to go with the potatoes.
As I said earlier, I don't have a love affair going with the ODP, so please don't call me a cheerleader! However, I do think it is reasonable to ask you to back up your claims with some proof.
Where's the beef to go with your stew?
[edited by: Liane at 7:26 pm (utc) on Jan. 15, 2003]
I totally agree. Some people just like having a go for the sake of it... they are totally blind to the enormous value of the ODP and simply close their ears to points like those you make so well above.
The ODP is a hell of an achievement, built purely on community goodwill. The guys who put so much into it should be applauded and recognized, and should not have to suffer the groundless moaning of those with their own agendas.
In fact, it seems there's the germ of a parlor game in this.
Previous winners include "Is AOL killing Time/Warner?" "Is Clinton killing Gore?" "Is Microsoft killing <whoever they just signed a contract with>" and "Is O.J. killing " ... no, I won't go there. Previous losers include "Is Java killing Microsoft" and "Is Microsoft killing security problems"
So my own entry in the next "the butler would never do that, he's too obvious a suspect" contest:
Is Inktomi killing Yahoo?
And my own proposal for the next contest:
"Black Helicopters Unveiled" -- find the least-suspected business affiliation by a corrupt ODP editor. (The competition will be fierce: you'll be competing against the farmer with a secret controlling share in the owners of the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the political opponent of renaissance faires (Progressive Party, I presume), and the tightly held monopoly on Asian ISPs.) So start digging....
Get rid of all the commercial categories.
That isn't a bad idea--why should anyone expect volunteers to help other people sell stuff?--but I can see two problems with implementing it:
1) Defining "commercial categories" could be tricky. Take travel: A hotel or a booking service is obviously commercial, a personal travelogue obviously isn't, but what about an "in between" site like Lonely Planet or Fodor's that offers editorial content but ultimately wants to sell its guidebooks?
2) Commercial Web sites could sneak into the index by submitting doorway sites or by submitting non-commercial sites that suddenly morph into commercial sites after they're listed. In other words, the "spam submissions" problem wouldn't go away; it would simply go underground.
so whining about it will continue to be useless.
Nobody forces any of the big SE's to use their data and if that data deteriorates one would expect them to drop it like a hot potato.
Maybe the real beef is not with ODP but those who use it. Vote with your feet, (or fingers).
You are ascribing far too much power to DMOZ. It's perfectly possible to develop profitable traffic for a site without a DMOZ listing.
And it isnt some game..these Editors have the power to either include you are deny you/ your company access to BILLIONS in revenues
Can you give an example of a business that today would be making (additional) billions in its revenue but (believes it) isn't because it can't get an ODP listing?
I'd like to see if that business' website matches ODP's submission criteria. If it does, I'll take the issue up with the apropriate meta.
This is BS. An ODP link really isn't worth any more than a link on any other page that transferred to same Google PR. Any company where revenues were even remotely close to billions could just buy advertising links on pages of other sites. The Big Boys in e-commerce don't need the ODP much. It's the little guy not getting an ODP link could be a problem.
S/he's made several big and easily verifiable claims.
I'm waiting for responses to message 23 and 37, If there is anything to them, we're talking headline news.
looks more like thread drift to me, the topic is "Is Google Killing ODP?", please can we keep on topic?
The answer is no, but it would be nice to pad that out a bit [on topic of course]. j/k
It seems that everyone these days is having problems getting into ODP and many are talking about it.
I take that this is in reference to sites getting rejected.
I personally don't know anyone having problems with getting a site listed that meets the current editorial guidelines of the ODP.
Could this perception of everyone having problems be due to the number of rejections that do not meet the editorial guidelines of the ODP? Is it possible that the number of rejections have increased due to the growth in the number of submissions? Just a guess.
Is Google killing the ODP? Maybe this is how you see it. I don't. I will agree that due to Google's popularity and prominence that there is a benefit to getting listed in the ODP and there are those that will try to exploit this. I doubt that it would be different for any other directory if it had the reach of the ODP.
This category has not been updated since July 2002!
I like the ODP, but to say that people aren't waiting....might be stretching it a bit.
a thread that puts both camps into ever more extreme positions, and convinces each side that the other are (add your own phrase).
Whilst it does make each contributor feel better, one feels that there must be a more constructive way of addressing the issues :(
Is Google Killing ODP?
Nope!
Symptoms: Career Spammers; Corrupt Editors; No Volunteers
A little like having a cold. Doesn't mean you are down and out for very long.
If you really believe these are any real influencing features of Google negatively affecting DMOZ and factual Symptoms...
Start your own "best of the web" directory rather than advocating someone elses failure to do so.
Maybe s/he was referring to lira or pesos.
Get rid of all the commercial categories. Its ridiculous to have volunteers running a commercial directory for no recompense at all. Commercial sites should expect to be pay to be listed - after all they do make money from their sites, and to many owners, its part of their business and a business expense. Let somone else run commercial directories - we already have Looksmart, Y! etc etc - or start a new one. In fact the Looksmart/Zeal demarcation in developing the Looksmart directory has merit and may even be working well!
Ahhhh.. an *intelligent* comment buried in the bitching! :) The Zeal/Looksmart split is a good one, but the ODP culture sadly wouldn't accept it. It's a *very* good point though.
Let's make an assumption that the majority of backlogged sites are in "commercial" categories. I can't see any reason why a SE like Google can't say: "We'll take the ODP data and BUILD on it. We can charge people for a listing - or even an enhanced listing - because there are all these people out there who would willingly pay, and in technological terms its dead easy compared with everything else we do." (By this I mean a PROPER directory not the Topsites.us rubbish).
Buckworks:
You are ascribing far too much power to DMOZ. It's perfectly possible to develop profitable traffic for a site without a DMOZ listing.
An old argument ;), but a valid one. A DMOZ listing certainly helps, but there are plenty of webmasters running successful (and *profitable*) sites without a DMOZ listing.
NFFC:
looks more like thread drift to me, the topic is "Is Google Killing ODP?", please can we keep on topic?
It's thanks to Google that the ODP is the most important web directory in the world. I love the way people keep posting that the ODP is dead.. over and over and over again. I think it's called being "in denial" :)
That's a pretty good turn around I'd say.
>A little like having a cold. Doesn't mean you are down and out for very long.
No, these are not symptoms, or temporary. These are endemic. The potential is ALWAYS there, and there is no magic bullet: each germ has to be tracked down and killed individually. They started long before Google, even before Lycos picked up the ODP They won't ever go away. And if we didn't exercise constant vigilance, the ODP would look like Zeal.
Quality is a global impression, but there are no global solutions. Each corrupt volunteer has a unique agenda. (In fact, when we find two corrupt parties with the same agenda, we can nearly always PROVE that they are working together, and usually that they share a gall bladder.) Quality can only be addressed one site, one spammer, one editor, one volunteer at a time.
Huh? Is this a reference to corruption at Zeal? I see little evidence that is a major concern at Zeal. Mostly because Zealots aren't allowed to add commercial sites.
My own self interest caused me to join, leave and now disregard this once important directory.
Actually, if I go back and re-read your original post before dauction derailed it I can see *your* point - basically, the POTENTIAL for corruption and only serving one's own interest is there.
There's quite a large churn of editors.. quite a lot join, add their site, do some unrevieweds and then never log in, and they are eventually replaced.
Some editors get bored after doing a good job and stop logging in.
Some editors are "hobbyists" and will maintain incredibly well-ordered categories that are comprehensive and authoritive because they have a passion.
And some editors are "career" ones who eventually wind up as metas looking after hundreds of thousands of sites.
Clearly more active editors is good, but it's a fundamental problem in *any* volunteer based organisation.. i.e. how do you get people to be committed to the project and not lose interest? How *do* you spot those who are purely self-serving without rejecting those who will make a contribution? This essentially is the job (and I mean JOB) of the metas - and there are those who think they're just in it to get a PR8 profile page - and it's a difficult job for which there isn't really any formal training. Indeed, I'd hazard that metas probably don't get a chance to do much actual editing.
But this has ALWAYS been the problem with the ODP.. you could argue that it should NEVER have succeeded, but it HAS. As long as the ODP is always looking at ways to improve itself and continue to grow in a meaningful way it will survive and make a valuable contribution.
Huh? Is this a reference to corruption at Zeal? I see little evidence that is a major concern at Zeal. Mostly because Zealots aren't allowed to add commercial sites.
But multiple (and excessive) deeplinking is tolerated at Zeal is a way that would be totally unacceptable at the ODP. And since deeplinking to content on a commercial site IS acceptable there's also the potential for abuse there too.
Darn.. topic drift again.
Submit to DMOZ- by all means- but don't rely on it and don't expect anything.
Edited for spelling.
My question is; On a daily basis, how and where is the DMOZ becoming less important?
Well, I think every day that DMOZ can't complete its RDF dump it becomes a little less important. What's the point in Google having a directory if they can't update it for months at a time?
And if we didn't exercise constant vigilance, the ODP would look like Zeal.
Not sure what this means...in most respects Zeal looks pretty good vs. DMOZ.
True, Zeal has a different deep linking policy. However, I haven't seen this being used to a material degree at Zeal with commercial sites with abusive intent. The problem with getting away with abuse at Zeal is all someone has to do is demonstrate "this is commercial" to get an editor whacked. At the ODP, commercial sites are allowed, and thus commercial content isn't per se abuse. Thus I'd say the ODP likely has more theoretical possibility of abuse. Haven't seen that much evidence of abuse rampant at the ODP though. I think what most people think is abuse at the ODP is merely that they presume that the fact their site hasn't been listed in half a year is due to abuse. When it is really that their site is just backlogged in the queue with over a million others.
ODP has always been a valuable resource, even more so now... but Google certainly has had an impact in several important aspects.
ODP editors hold a brief to go forth, find the quality, and build their categories. Since Google, especially in the commercial cats, editors are swamped by the tide of "me too" submissions that range from excellent to road kill. Editors spend more time as policemen trying to maintain compliance to their TOS than as CONTRIBUTING editors.
If there is one area that Google has hurt the ODP it is that Googles obsession with links drives all websites to ODP's door. The sheer volume of increased submissions cannot be processed in a time frame (there are always exceptions)that Joe Public finds acceptable. That leads to criticisms, which blow out into the cr**, vilification, lies, deceipt and half truths that we see in the regular ODP bashing threads throughout the forums. That is not good PR and there is not much the ODP can do about it.
Since Google, the ODP has gone from a low profile, little known and even less understood directory to being firmly caught in the headlights of the seo/Google road train. All its pimples and imperfections are now up for a lot more scrutiny that previously. Not necessarily a bad thing...
The key to the OPDP's success is, has been, and always will be, availability of editors willing to add more than just their own sites before decamping. Google has added a whole new level of complexity to deciding on becoming an editor, or remaining an editor. That is where the real hurt may occur.
Yeah, I've almost gotta wonder if the ODP should bother with commercial cats with all the spam they attract? I am an ODP editor who recently went through a huge pile of unrevieweds in a rather largish cat space, many which were over 2 years old. While part of this cat space is commercial, it definitely isn't one of the more "spammy" areas. I had to slog through a *lot* of spam. :( I've gotta figure that the cats at the ODP that do tend to attract spam must be drowning in it. And, the fact the ODP currently has well over a million greens leads me to suspect my hunch is right. Spammers are killing the ODP, and Google's obsession with links isn't helping.
