dstanovic

old_crone, I don't like to admit it publicly but I agree with you /images/icons/frown.gif I have been editing for just over a month and I listed my first "submitted" description yesterday (I almost emailed the submitter to say “thanks”). That's the first listing in the few hundred I have added. Just listing the "real" name of the company would be a great help. We wouldn’t have to search by the phone number etc. Just a tip : Many times I have looked at the "source" for the default page and the meta name="description" content is the same as what was submitted to dmoz. This works for some search engine submissions - doesn't for dmoz. Dave

hutcheson, Well said /images/icons/smile.gif Dave

ipmconsults, <<How is it that SO MANY sites get away with the domain name tactic of using numbers and keywords? It's proliferate throughout the ODP and Yahoo.>> First guess would be the category editors are overwhelmed with new submissions and do not have the time to go through and clean the category up. I have been editing for a couple weeks and it is unbelievable how much time it takes to weed through the spam in unreviewed site submissions. I have editing privileges in three categories and I approach them in the following order. 1. Review the unreviewed and weed out the spam. 2. Review and move the unreviewed sites that do not belong in the category. 3. Review and rewrite the descriptions, titles, and list the sites that do belong. 4. Review and rewrite the descriptions and titles of the existing sites already listed. As you can see I try to get new sites listed and then cleanup the category. I spent many hours editing today and more than half of the time was spent weeding out the spam and finding the correct category for sites that do not belong. I was told that things look different from this side of the fence. I can only say "you have no idea how different". Dave

ipmconsults, No, the "real" name of the company should always be used. Dave

Ohboydmoz, I have been editing for only a week. If most categories “unreviewed” are anything like the categories I edit (which I’m sure they are), those numbers mean very little. The numbers you quoted on the unreviewed would drop dramatically if you take out the following: 1.duplicate submissions (honest/dishonest) 2.sites that do not belong in the category 3.sites that are trying to get listings in every possible category whether they belong there or not. I spend more time working through the above than actually listing sites that belong in the categories I edit. It’s a shame people spam the directory as it only hurts the legitimate site submissions /images/icons/frown.gif My 2-cents

qbp, <<hey, how do I know what smileys I can post, BTW?) >> http://www.resource-zone.com/faq_english.php?Cat=#html /images/icons/blush.gif/images/icons/cool.gif/images/icons/crazy.gif/images/icons/frown.gif/images/icons/laugh.gif/images/icons/mad.gif/images/icons/shocked.gif/images/icons/smile.gif/images/icons/tongue.gif/images/icons/wink.gif

Angela, Just wanted to send a Welcome your way /images/icons/smile.gif Have Fun, Dave

OH, those "Greens" /images/icons/smile.gif

kujanomiko, I am so used to DMOZ Green and the editor screen is done in blue /images/icons/smile.gif

sabre23t, Thanks, <<It is really the greener side.>> Actually I was surprised to see the “other” side is predominately blue and white /images/icons/smile.gif Take Care, Dave

Jim, Thanks for the Welcome! Dave

apeuro, Thanks /images/icons/smile.gif dstanovic

Can I get a change from Member to Editor title? Thanks, dstanovic

wayfarer, He was probably reading the editors notes. Lighten up /images/icons/smile.gif Have a Good Evening

safvan, You're Welcome. In the future try to keep all of your posts on a subject in one thread since you basically received the same answer from an editor and myself /images/icons/smile.gif Have a Good Evening Dave

hutcheson, Oops! I just posted basically the same thing to his question in another part of the forum /images/icons/smile.gif Sorry, Dave

safvan, As long as your site is listed in the category and the hyperlink is correct everything will be fine /images/icons/smile.gif The search engine on DMOZ/ODP is mostly used by editors and someone like yourself checking their listing. The search function can be very flakey at times. Your site will be included when a search engine like Google gets the information for your sites category. I know it can be nerve racking - don't worry as we have all gone through this at one time or another /images/icons/smile.gif

This is quite natural and don't worry about it. You can find more info on the subject in Bugs and Features section of this forum. Dave S.

kujanomiko, Thanks for the reply and info /images/icons/smile.gif Dave

Khym_Chanur, Thanks for the info and reply. BTW I always wanted to tell you how it makes me /images/icons/smile.gif everytime I read your sig << Give a man a match>>. Thanks Again, Dave

vmcknight, So there is "something" to large categories that I wasn't aware of (I'm sure there is much more that I'm not aware of). Thanks for that info since I was unaware of this /images/icons/smile.gif I am sure that things will work out - they always do /images/icons/wink.gif Sincerely, Dave Stanovic

hutcheson, Your post makes a lot of sense /images/icons/smile.gif I think that it is often looked upon as abuse by an editor when you see some of the keyword stuffed descriptions given. I am sure 99% of the time it is due to bad editing by a inexperienced editor. When I submit descriptions for DMOZ I always start out with a full description (about a paragraph or 25-30 words), then I try to keep chipping away at what "really" describes the site and get rid of the fluff. Most of the time I end up with a 6-8 word description upon submission. If the editor changes the description, I have found most of the time they actually add words to the description. That's when I know that I'm not adding fluff and hype /images/icons/smile.gif Thanks, Dave S.

Donald, I understand your dilemma. But this reminds me of a thread about the religious categories. I don’t understand what the “size” of a category has to do with anything – again, reminds me of a religious category thread ? Lets be realistic about it – no matter how you break down the categories those companies that did not use names like “1web-design” would never be seen anyways if a user was browsing the DMOZ site. I don’t expect things to change since I am one user and I am sure the editors have thought about this long and hard before coming to this decision. I know categories don’t change on a whim but I cannot help but state the “Basic” still rubs me the wrong way and “cheapens” the sites listed there. Seems like it could be “Designers” instead of Basic Designers and “Extended Features”, “Extended Technologies”, “Extended Designers”, “Comprehensive Technology Designers” or “Extended Services” instead of Full Service. When the term “basic” is applied alongside the term “full service” you cannot help but feel you are doing “without” something by choosing “basic” service. Trouble is I believe that at least 70% of the sites that will be listed in the “Basic” category perform/offer services on a daily basis that fit into the “Full Service” category. I will certainly change our site in the near future (it's going to be completely changed as it is ugly)and list all of our services so that we will comply with the “Full Service” category “only” because we do, and I cannot stand that term “basic” (I know that may sound terrible/petty but that’s how bad I think that category description is). I will then try for a category change. It is just when someone does a search for “Ohio search engine optimization” in Google I don’t want them hit with our DMOZ listing stating “Basic Designers”. I really enjoy this forum and the editors who post here and I believe this forum brings to light the everyday dilemmas that are faced by the editors. I hope my comments do not add to your dilemmas /images/icons/smile.gif Thanks Again, Dave Stanovic

Donald and Keith, I agree with you guys in so many ways /images/icons/smile.gif Since my opinion was asked: Since http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Designers/ is the top category and these are the following sub-categories: Basic Service Dynamic and Multimedia Freelance Full Service I would have instead (call me stupid if you want) /images/icons/smile.gif Corporate Ecommerce Multimedia Small Business Since almost all designers fit/specialize in one of the above categories – even by their description of their existing listing in DMOZ. You could even make it more relevant (might be stretching it) by adding categories including “Non-Profit” and “Personal” since I have noticed the two mentioned quite often. Freelance seems like a confused category listing both peoples names and businesses and should be able to be migrated into one of the above. (below was taken from descriptions in full service area) Full service doesn’t make any sense since most web developers offer domain registration, search engine submission, graphic design, publishing, maintenance, Java, consulting, scanning pictures, and hosting services (I am sure at least 90% of hosting, isp services by web designers is affiliate as most design firms do not run their own isp/web servers – I do not use affiliate just recommend a host). I do not believe hosting, graphics design (all of the above under full service)etc etc etc should come into play at all. Most web designers provide these services in one way or another, also there are separate categories in DMOZ for these services. The above mentioned categories would allow someone browsing the ODP for services go directly to the category of their interest. This is my opinion on the subject that I believe is the most “user” friendly and fair to all. Sincerely, Dave Stanovic

donaldb, Great post and so was the post by Khym_Chanur. I am simply asking if it is a requirement to provide a list of services page on a website to get into the Top Level>>Designers? I would imagine that most of the developers do/will provide the bulk of these services that are described above. We do, and we don’t advertise it – maybe we should. Also this seems to be hanging on the description that was given by DMOZ editors of your site. It’s amazing to go through the categories and wonder how some sites get every keyword put into their description and others get a four word description. I am not complaining of my own sites because I think every description given by an editor has been fair, clear and concise. That said you can leave my site wherever you see fit, as this is your option /images/icons/smile.gif Let’s get away from my site for a moment: As a user and a zealous supporter of DMOZ/ODP I cannot help but see where this can change the users perspective on the professionalism of companies put into this category. Did you ever meet a person that wanted their company represented as/by a "basic" company? Would you want to state that your site is being developed by a "basic" development company? As has been repeated by many editors – “who really uses DMOZ to search for anything?” If a user tried to use DMOZ to find a web development company I think most would give up after Designers>A. So designers B-Z would never have a chance if anyone ever "really" used DMOZ to find a web development company (there are just too many). This brings me to the point where it has been repeated and I agree with – “DMOZ/ODP is for users not for site owners” . Since users will “NEVER” go through DMOZ Designers>> to find a web development company to fit their needs (it would literally take days) – how are they likely to sort through all of the web developers? My guess would be a SE like Google. So if you take all these so-called “basic” (which is very judgmental in my opinion) web designers and stick them in a lower category, what are the chances they will get represented equally by DMOZ data? I can give my opinion – zilch. The Google PR of this lower category might as well be zero compared to the top level designers category. It can be said this has to do more with site owners than users of DMOZ/ODP data but in this case I disagree. If users are not given “relevant” results because of DMOZ change in structure this is a reflection on DMOZ/ODP itself. Just my 2-cents I am not trying to start anything resembling some of the posts in this forum - I am merely stating my honest opinion. Sincerely, David Stanovic