Forum Moderators: open
note: no bashing or flaming of the ODP or Google.
Just your view of how the world of Google and SERPs in your sector of the industry would change?
In mine's it would be massive, especially for companies who have enjoyed an extended relationship within the ODP only. There is thousands of them.
?
Dave
Taking six or more months to add new sites to the directory is like reading a newspaper with the heading "The U.S. attacks Iraq!" when the "war" was over more than three months ago...it's just ridiculous! :)
Google should let directories do what directories do, and concentrate on spidering the web and indexing the best sites it possible can in its SEARCH engine. Such great weight should not be placed on just one or two links in my opinion.
Yes, I am one of "those" site owners who is patiently waiting for a DMOZ editor (who may not exist?) to add my site to the appropriate category I submitted to. However, I am not soly relying on DMOZ for a good PR link. You have to be pro-active and look for those links yourself with great, on-topic sites similar to your own.
Site one misplaced in the OPD generates $1.45 million per year in net profit from sales of a little over $80 million per year.
Site two correctly placed in the OPD generates about $70k net profit per year.
Most things are actually equal between these two sites as I own them both, the only big influence is one gains huge PR from the OPD and the other doesn't. The big gainer also gains huge from Yahoo, due to its age, where as the newer (2 year old) site doesn't.
Argue till the cows come home that these links are not important if you wish.......I would hate to see them killed as I know how much revenue those links via PR generate.
In this particular category it is almost impossible to get incoming valuable links from other sites. This is a competitive environment where almost all offers of reciprocal links are turned down. The OPD and Yahoo both offer cheap forms of high power one way links.
I understand that some like rfgdxm1 do not see this.....they operate in cats where the competition is minimal and the game is very different.
To those of us that play at the high-stakes tables these links are very important, and if you can get a break by manipulating an OPD or Yahoo editor the financial outcome is significant.
These types of sites can not easily get their PR or link pop from other sources. The OPD and Yahoo are huge influences for us.....that we have to try to manipulate because our competitors do.
I would like to see Google drop the ODP because of the very manipulation I take part in.....I plead guilty to the charge.....but I have to do it, or else I will lose the competitive edge. If Google dumps the ODP I can stop playing this dumb games which cost me money.....and get on with what really counts!
<snip>
generates $1.45 million per year in net profit from sales of a little over $80 million per year
Surely you are not trying to suggest that this is down to ODP?
[edited by: Marcia at 2:23 am (utc) on Sep. 22, 2003]
[edit reason] Real URL - edited. [/edit]
Do people REALLY believe stuff like that? I have a problem myself believing that some folks are so divorced from reality.
The problem with a thread like this is that some people are such devoted ODP haters that they will never find anything good to say about it. The thread is doomed with these guys around.
It's the biggest and best directory by a million miles from a user perspective on virtually every sensible criteria. The only people who can't accept that seem to be those who can't manipulate it (or buy into it) for their own ends. I doubt somehow that Google is going to worry too much about that.
This seems like a truly inefficient way to acquire links to me--it takes many hours to write up a site with enough content to get it to PR4, and it takes only a few zipped-off emails to get an existing PR4 site to link to you.
However, if you WANT to do this, I can't imagine that any directory or search engine would consider it abusive (assuming you mean that you're going to create content pages and put links on them to your affiliate site or whatever, not that you're going to create content sites, get them listed, and then turn them into redirects to your site, which I believe can get you banned from Google and I know can get your site delisted at the ODP).
But as long as you're not talking about bait-and-switch, I don't see what's wrong with creating informational sites on various obscure topics and putting a link to your main page on each of them. You're still providing content people might be interested in, so directories and search engines will have a legitimate desire to list it. *shrug*
Please tell me what the PR is of both the ODP and Google directory cats, and how many other sites appear in these cats? I'm guessing that buying links with equal or better PR would be quite cheap.
"If Google dropped ODP, it would be a horrible blow to the quality of Internet searches. It would damage Google's credibilityThat is actually the truth in so many areas...."
I was going to try and submit my new site to DMOZ again so I started by trying to find a category for it. I looked up my keyword and clicked the category link:
ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While trying to retrieve the URL: [editors.dmoz.org:8081...]
The following error was encountered:
Access Denied.
Access control configuration prevents your request from being allowed at this time. Please contact your service provider if you feel this is incorrect.
Your cache administrator is webmaster@dmoz.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generated Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:05:42 GMT by dmoz.org (squid/2.5.STABLE3)
You're right. There's no substitute for high quality search results. Just don't expect them from DMOZ. They're dragging Google's reputatation through the mud with service like this.
Arnett, search results - what we get with a crawler engine - has nothing whatsoever to do with human-edited directory content. And ODP is not, nor have they ever been, in the search business. In fact, they never have been a business.
>dragging Google's reputatation through the mud
Only with webmasters and frankly I don't think the editors really care about that. Not searchers either, who don't know the difference.
The only ones who care are webmasters whose sites aren't getting in. And the searchers don't care about them either because when they look through the directory listings they don't have a clue about sites that aren't there.
Frankly, I think Google is more interested in their searchers, and I doubt if they're seriously concerned over what webmasters think of them or consider their reputation to be on the basis of not having their sites in the Directory.
Anyone who thinks it's garbage should just vote with their mouse and stay clear of ODP altogether. None of us has had a personal invitation from them to submit our sites and if we don't show up at the party it'll go on without us as usual.
I don't often use directories, unless I am looking up some sort of goverment department. The other time that I use the directories is when the directory category comes up as a search result. At that point I tend to dig through the category for the information rather than going back through the search results.
As a searcher, I rarely care if a specific site comes up. And when I dig through a directory, I care even less. So it doesn't really matter if it takes the editors 6 months or more, as long as the directory has some useful sites.
Napoleon...I would agree with you that ODP is likely the best directory out there. But it is still far from perfect, VERY far from perfect.
Google wants to have relevancy. Well, how can it possibly accomplish this when the ODP listings are NOT relevent and it takes upwards of a year for a new site to get listed? And don't give me this crap that all new sites are "unworthy" of a listing in the ODP. Many new sites are MUCH better and far more up to date than some old sites in the ODP.
And for crying out loud, someone in a previous post admitted that he uses corrupt tactics to get a listing in ODP. This is just one person admitting to this, how many others are doing the exact same thing? Probably more than anyone is willing to admit.
<snip>
[edited by: Marcia at 2:28 am (utc) on Sep. 22, 2003]
[edit reason] No quotes - copyright issue per TOS. [/edit]
And precisely how is this supposed to be accomplished with a limited number of volunteer editors, and over a million unreviewed sites in the queue?
And precisely how is this supposed to be accomplished with a limited number of volunteer editors, and over a million unreviewed sites in the queue?
It won't happen and you know it. Find the contact info for the editor of the category that you want to submit to (if anyone edits the category) and email them your submission information with a scan of a $100 bill attached.
Seriously, don't try to bribe editors, with fake money or real money; it can get your sites banned. If you need a link now-right-now, you should look elsewhere. As rfgdxm1 keeps pointing out, an ODP link is only weighted twice as far as Google is concerned... if you got two links from mid-ranking sites, it would be just as good as an ODP link anyway.
And the sad truth about the Internet is: it's huge, and any one particular site is a drop in the bucket. The ODP could be ten times what it is now, utterly fantastic, 90% of all websites with rich content indexed within weeks of creation, and still yours might not be among them, and still no one but you would be upset about it. There are new sites on the ODP (and Zeal, and all the other major directories) every *hour*. They're very good resources, they're not at all dead (updated quite frequently), and the search engines are all very happy to have such good spider food. You think they're suddenly going to start banning human-edited directories from Google? Are you completely on crack? :-D Directories are a great source of good links for search engines, no matter whether they're complete or incomplete. Google is never going to "drop" any of them. Get real.
I have just emailed the editor of the category I submitted to. No, I did not bribe, plea or post my site information. I just kindly asked approximately how long does it take sites submitted in this category to get reviewed? I'm doubtful the editor will answer my message which begs the question as to why they even have a form posted for you to contact them in the first place. However, I am hopeful, and a fairly patient guy...I can and will wait. After all, the editor is hopefully busy reviewing and adding new sites! :)
You're right, I have successfully made partnerships with many sites and so for me, the listing in ODP is not absolutely crucial. However, it is the impression I have that the ODP is an exclusive club of sites that makes me want to get in there. We want what we sometimes can't have, right? ;)
Dave.
<snip>
My reply:
In the meantime it makes ODP,Google and everyone else associated with DMOZ look terrible. It's not doing your reputation a bit of good. You're obviously unconcerned.Great service. Keep up the good work. Here's a gold star for you:
*
[edited by: Marcia at 2:26 am (utc) on Sep. 22, 2003]
[edit reason] No private emails or quotes from sites, no naming names please. [/edit]
To notify editors of high priority matters. Such as a listed site about growing petunias changing into a porn site overnight. Unlikely asking how long it will be will get a reply or speed things up.
Well, it is exclusive, in a way. I don't think you'd be totally offbase thinking of an ODP listing as a web award of sorts. It can take a while to be rewarded with one, that's all.
You can always check on your submission's status at the public board. Most of us don't like to reply to submitters because a >very< small percentage of them are total psychos who start threatening to blow your house up if you don't list their affiliate site. :-0
>It's quite clear who is and who is not an editor.
Yeah, that would generally be pretty clear, I think. (-: There's a very marked difference of opinion between editors and (some) submitters as to what editors' job ought to be. To wit:
>It seems to indicate a lot about their concern for quality service.
It is our opinion that we're not required to service you. We're not your servants, we weren't signed on to the project so as to be your servants, and we're not interested in being your servants. You can rail about our failure to serve you well till the cows come home, and you may even have good points, but you're still just yelling at the wind for not blowing your boat where you want it to go. Get a better-designed boat, or learn to tack. There is no, zero, chance of you ever convincing a bunch of volunteer editors dedicated to something other than you that we exist to serve you; I'm sorry, but it's the plain truth.
DMOZ *might* be the 'best' out there at present (very debatable though) but this WILL change. Google very *obvioulsy* do not hold much weight on directories as they only update it once in a blue moon. The reason they don't is that DMOZ is so sloooooowwwwwww in adding new sites and even updating once a month would be a waste of time.
Google are very good at what they do and if directories are here to stay (quite possibly not) they will no doubt build their own to keep the quality in-line with their search results.
So, in answer to "Now what would happen if G decided that the ODP wasn't up to scratch" I think G would already see ODP as not "up to scratch" but for now, as there are few better and directories are no longer as popular, they will stick with the best of the worst.
Dave
And oh yeah - how does Zeal do their links to sites? Anyone seen them in their backlinks or adding any PR to their sites lately?
The whole crux of the matter is NOT that *some* webmasters give a hoot whether or not their site is in ODP. They want the link and the Page Rank is what they want, to improve their rankings so they can make money.
>>Many site owners probably don't bother submitting to DMOZ as it's often futile. There IS a reason why most dislike DMOZ.
Maybe I should stick around here the board and read a little more so I won't miss something so important, but it seems to me that the *most* who dislike DMOZ are the ones who aren't getting or don't have their sites in there.
[edited by: Marcia at 2:40 am (utc) on Sep. 22, 2003]
This is exactly the problem with threads like this. They are hijacked by people who are angry at their own exclusion... and I'll bet 99.9% of the time it is exclusion with a very good cause.
The ODP is a great product. The ODP haters should try using it objectively sometime from a user perspective.
The quality of the user experience is actually all that matters at the end of the day. It scores very well from this perspective, much better than any other directory. Some people just can't face that... and they especially can't face the fact that it scores well even without including their own site. The same old people trotting out the same old flawed anti-ODP abuse is tiresome.
Yes, they are hijacked, when the forum charter clearly says "no whining".
Directories are no-where near as popular as they use to be and, as already mentioned Google knows this. You only have to look at your Web stats to see this! Thousands of other directories feed off DMOZ yet the combined traffic is next to nothing. If they were popular Google would have dumped the ODP years ago and put in place it's own.
To try and argue that anyone who 'knocks' DMOZ is simply a case of sour grapes is a very weak argument, if fact it's no argument at all. To say that DMOZ is the best out there means little, you only have to start clicking links in the ODP to see how bad it really is. While the volunteer concept started off well, it has now fallen into a heap.
Dave
For most sites that launch today, they won't see a DMOZ listing for over 6 months and quite often more than one year. So in a world where Google is trying to make their content more "Fresh" & "Accurate", why would they want to represent their site with such a "Non-Fresh" and "Inaccurate" Directory. I can't even begin to add up the number of DMOZ sites that return "Page not found errors".
The editors of the DMOZ, obviously spend a lot of time working to create a decent directory, and even more time defending their work in forums just like this. The question really becomes, why spend so much time defending something, if it is not broken?
