Tom40x, you can stick to your story. But I'll insist that the founders expected that the ODP have effects that they didn't expect, and I know that they did, because I remember them discussing that in the internal forums.
OK, so let's assume the ODP has this effect.
Is that a problem with the ODP? No, whatever OTHER effects it may have, it still has its primary intended effect.
Is that a problem for surfers? No. If they wish to visit two different sites, the ODP suggests two sites to them. And that's (1) two more than they knew about before, and (2) if one of those two sites serves their need, that's enough. They either come out ahead, with the ODP as it is, or they no worse off than before. (Or, if they feel they are on average worse off after looking at the ODP than before looking at it, their problem is easily solved -- and doesn't enter into THIS analysis.)
Is that a problem for webmasters? No. They have a choice to build, or not build, a site. They can evaluate the competition beforehand. They know the difficulties of promoting a new site, and they can make whatever provisions are needed, in their judgment.
But here's another "unexpected" effect the ODP might have: it encourages people to build unique content. Because the more competition there is in a category, the less likely editors are to spend time reviewing additional sites -- we'll focus on finding the sites that HAVE NO COMPETITION AND DON'T NEED ANY! Obviously, there's no way to force people to do something socially valuable: you are free to post whatever you want. But the prudent person, contemplating the problem you describe, may well consider whether his efforts should be redirected towards something that the world might miss if it disappeared.
And if I could have an effect on other people's work, that's one of the effects I'd really like to have.
OK, so let's assume the ODP has this effect.
Is that a problem with the ODP? No, whatever OTHER effects it may have, it still has its primary intended effect.
Is that a problem for surfers? No. If they wish to visit two different sites, the ODP suggests two sites to them. And that's (1) two more than they knew about before, and (2) if one of those two sites serves their need, that's enough. They either come out ahead, with the ODP as it is, or they no worse off than before. (Or, if they feel they are on average worse off after looking at the ODP than before looking at it, their problem is easily solved -- and doesn't enter into THIS analysis.)
Is that a problem for webmasters? No. They have a choice to build, or not build, a site. They can evaluate the competition beforehand. They know the difficulties of promoting a new site, and they can make whatever provisions are needed, in their judgment.
But here's another "unexpected" effect the ODP might have: it encourages people to build unique content. Because the more competition there is in a category, the less likely editors are to spend time reviewing additional sites -- we'll focus on finding the sites that HAVE NO COMPETITION AND DON'T NEED ANY! Obviously, there's no way to force people to do something socially valuable: you are free to post whatever you want. But the prudent person, contemplating the problem you describe, may well consider whether his efforts should be redirected towards something that the world might miss if it disappeared.
And if I could have an effect on other people's work, that's one of the effects I'd really like to have.
