If "Google replace ODP with Yahoo Directory"

In case Google use the Y! listings... instead ODP

[billy_t9]

The recent tweaking of Y! shows that in the near future the above case might be very close to become a reality.
As most of Webmasters have complaints about ODP dominance in categories or total absence of an editor maybe a more non voluntary directory might be able to react better for every listing so to force everyone to get a Y! listing.
So if this agreement ends like this maybe Y! could see a huge rise in revenues.
But dont know the SERPS how could look like with such a change.....

already thinking to express submit before Y! change their prices

[cminblues]

If "Google replace ODP with Yahoo Directory"

I think a mixed solution should[will?] happen.

Commercial -> Yahoo
Non-commercial -> Dmoz

cminblues

[NoCarrier]

We are in total "what if" twilight zone speculation here.

I don't see why google would want to end the DMOZ relationship.

Don't forget that AOL owns DMOZ and AOL has a contract with google.

[Visit Thailand]

Also there is a very big difference between a paid for directory listing and a free directory listing.

[cminblues]

A bit OT, I know..

But, a propos, try 'aol dmoz' [quoted & not-quoted] in Google.. ;)

cminblues

[mbauser2]

I think a mixed solution should[will?] happen.

Commercial -> Yahoo
Non-commercial -> Dmoz

I doubt Google's stupid enough to think that's a functional distinction. The line between commericial and noncommericial sites (and categories) is too fuzzy to assume all the editors will see the same line, and hiring referees to manage the line will just suck up Google's money.

[Powdork]

But, a propos, try 'aol dmoz' [quoted & not-quoted] in Google..

I would really love to see what the serps for this looked like before the last update.

[espeed]

> The recent tweaking of Y! shows that in the near future the above
> case might be very close to become a reality.

I doubt it. If Google replaced ODP with Yahoo!, Google would become dependant on Yahoo!, and Yahoo! could pressure Google to do what it wanted by threatening to terminate the relationship and take away its directory. With ODP, an open source solution, even if AOL, the parent company of Netscape, terminated its relationship with Google and the ODP, Google would retain rights to use the existing ODP data.

By using ODP instead of Yahoo! as its data source, Google has more control and can offer a consistent service to its users.

[littleman]

The Y! directory on google will be an incentive for webmasters to keep signing up with express submission. This is a way for google to scratch yahoo's back without costing anything.

The only loser would be ODP, but I doubt aol will care much.

[cminblues]

mbauser2 wrote:

The line between commercial and noncommercial sites (and categories) is too fuzzy to assume all the editors will see the same line

There are obvious, automated ways to doing this.
No need of humans.
Google sure is not stupid on this [->automation] :)

cminblues

[Brad]

I never liked the structure of the Yahoo directory that much. Do you really think the public will prefer it to ODP?

[cminblues]

Maybe the new Google-Yahoo directory will look like the actual Google-Dmoz, but with a human 'not-volunteer' editor boost.

cminblues

[mbauser2]

There are obvious, automated ways to doing this.

You are the only person in the world who believes this.

Please describe your "automated" method for separating commercial and non-commercial sites. I'd really like to see it.

[SEOPTI]

There are tons of sites cheating with expired domains from dmoz because dmoz
has been not able to solve this problem so far.

This should be the main reason to replace it with Yahoo! listings.

[heini]

Please don't forget this (I know, I say this every time this discussion comes up ;)):
Google is an international engine, with the US being very likely less than 50% of their market.

They can't base their system on a purely US directory the way they can do it with ODP.

[cminblues]

mbauser2 wrote:

>>There are obvious, automated ways to doing this.<<
You are the only person in the world who believes this.
Please describe your "automated" method for separating commercial and non-commercial sites. I'd really like to see it.

I talk of course about an already Google-ranked site.

Examples of my absurd automated methods:

1] -> Amount and 'area' of queries that, in the real searches, give this site high in the serps.

2] -> [less relevant] Maybe this site being listed in a 'commercial' yahoo dir.

cminblues

[Beachboy]

Presence on the web page of "price" or "order" or $ or other indicator of a sum or of a shopping cart. Yes, I know that's a crude and over-simplistic notion, but that's the best you get when I haven't had even a half cup of coffee yet. ;)

[topr8]

Please describe your "automated" method for separating commercial and non-commercial sites. I'd really like to see it.

i'm no programmer but my method would be.

define commercial for a start then

spider the pages...
mark down as commercial any pages with the following...
affiliate links, ad banners from known syndicators, shopping carts (any pages linking to ssl parts of a site could be a clue)

the list goes on and like beachboy i haven't given the concept my full attention either.

[rmjvol]

affiliate links, ad banners from known syndicators, shopping carts (any pages linking to ssl parts of a site could be a clue)

By your definition of commercial sites, you've just disadvantaged the following blatant commercial endeavors.

Commercial sites with shopping carts:
Make a Wish Foundation [wish.org] - Buy shirts & other commercial stuff
American Red Cross [redcross.org] - soliciting your hard earned cash

Commercial site with affiliate program:
American Cancer Society Master Card [cancer.org] - Don't the best affiliate spammers get the company to rebrand/private label the offering? Makes it easier to trick those ODP editors, right? They even set up a blatant doorway domain:
[americancancercard.com...] We could check for well known tactics like that, too.

Ad banners from known syndicators:
Every free-hosting site on the freakin web.

Maybe it's not so easy to automate this...
Did somebody say "humans do it better"?

[topr8]

By your definition of commercial sites, you've just disadvantaged the following blatant commercial endeavors. etc etc

as you well know any sophisticated system would have many many factors included not just a simple ban shopping carts algo, exceptions can be found programatically using keywords, lists of known charities and so on, given the inclination i think google could do it if they chose to prioritise the project

Ad banners from known syndicators:
Every free-hosting site on the freakin web.

yes but most free web space is provided by a handful of well known domains, it would be easy enough to filter them into the non commercial catagory if they didn't trip any other alarms

Maybe it's not so easy to automate this...
Did somebody say "humans do it better"?

i completely disagree, of course human reviews and catagorisations are good, but
1. genuine errors occur
2. fraudulant editors exist
3. sites can change

an automated system would also make mistakes but i expect no more than humans would.

<aside>
i cannot believe there is anyone in this business who doesn't admire the efforts of the genuine editors in the odp and elsewhere

BUT i also know that you don't have to look long in the 3 main directories...
ODP, yahoo and LS ... to see that there are large numbers of very commercial sites listed in either non commercial catagories or in the case of the pay directories are listed for free.

sometimes, just sometimes humans can stink

[rfgdxm1]

>They can't base their system on a purely US directory the way they can do it with ODP.

I think *this* is the key point. Google has to consider their worldwide users.

[rmjvol]

as you well know any sophisticated system would have many many factors included not just a simple ban shopping carts algo, exceptions can be found programatically using keywords, lists of known charities and so on

Absolutlely agree with you. I'd expect that to have any chance of properly deciding if a site is commercial or non-commercial, the sophisticated system would need to have maybe 100 or more factors. And then they'd probably want to monitor and tweak it every month.

Hey Larry, what if we set the affiliate link red flag at 3 links this month?
OK Sergey, but we'll have to cross reference that with the "Is There *Enough* Unique Content" filter so that we don't knock out too many Britney Spears fan sites like we did last month.

I think you nailed the key to this sub-topic debate right here:

if they chose to prioritise the project

To have a chance of accurately deciding if a site is really a non-commercial site is going to take a ton of money/effort/work/tweaking. I'd bet it'll take a lot more work than that invisible text filter. And we all know you never see sites with invisible text anymore on G.

Littleman said:
The Y! directory on google will be an incentive for webmasters to keep signing up with express submission. This is a way for google to scratch yahoo's back without costing anything.

But introducing the sophisticated system required with the AI to discern commercial *intent* would cost alot.

We may see Google drop the ODP for Y! but I'd say that the ODP/Y! combination that you've described would be too much messing around for too little benefit.

[johnraphone]

Both DMOZ and Yahoo directory have many things to be disired. Both directories are very slow in getting listed unless you pay someone off. I have been wait to get in each over 6 months. DMOZ editors often delete competion or modify description to hurt rank. Yahoo editors allow door way pages yet reject stong content web sites.

Maybe Google could create there own directory, this way all sites might be able to get listed.