Dmoz my personal view.

None of the following is intended to be disrespectful, just my point of view of where Dmoz is failing.

The Open Directory Project (ODP), also known as DMOZ, produces a comprehensive directory of Web sites by relying on a team of thousands of volunteer editors. Over the past few years, the ODP has boomed in importance. Why? Because it provides directory results to Lycos, HotBot, Netscape, AOL Search, Google Directory, Alta Vista, Yahoo and more.
Please make a note of what ODP stands for (open directory project).

You may believe that when an organisation like Dmoz becomes too big, then the concept about why Dmoz was formed in the first place simply disappears. The ODP is basically a comprehensive directory of links, not a search engine.
Designed originally for people to add their site and link for a web site, which is of value, informative and of general use to the visitor, early submitters of web sites misused the concept, hence a guideline for editors was introduced.
Only problem now is the guidelines are so strict, it is nearly impossible to get a web site that fills the criteria mentioned above to be included.
For instance spelling mistakes, grammar or poor layout within the context of a web site should not necessarily mean non-inclusion to the directory, as millionaires have sold from such web sites so they must be of value to the visitor.

Incorrectly filling out, add URL form, unfortunately you will not be informed of this error, so you will wait to see if your site has been included, the only way to verify this is by joining the Dmoz forum and using up the valuable time of an ODP moderator.
Would it not make more sense for Dmoz, to include a simple URL checker within their search results which would tell you instantly if your web site has been included, thus freeing up more time for the editors to continue with their good work.

This omission of URL search criteria within Dmoz, for the inclusion of your web site leads editors to frustration, and instead of showing a little human kindness and compassion to the webmaster. The editors only comments will be that of word for word text copied from the rules and guidelines which you have not adhered too. Which still leaves you bewildered as to why your site has not been included.
Please bring back democracy to Dmoz , thus allowing the editors to become human once again.

It is not good to have so much power and influence over what should or should not be included in what is basically a public directory, and maybe the above might just give an insight into what the volunteer editors have to endure.
Or the future of Dmoz as a respected directory, because as well we all know, the mighty will fall, as seen by many of the major search engines.

Don't give up yet webmasters and keep submitting to DMOZ. You never know you might just get in sooner or later, once the pressure is lifted off the editors.

PS:. I am also convinced that within DMOZ there are some real hard working editors who joined because they have a genuine interest in fair play.

Kind regards
Janet

spelling mistakes, grammar or poor layout within the context of a web site should not necessarily mean non-inclusion to the directory

Click to expand...

They don't. Lack of unique content does.

Would it not make more sense for Dmoz, to include a simple URL checker within their search results

Click to expand...

one already exists in (the albeit not always the most up to date) search function. use the url without the http:// or www in the form urlname.com and it will be found (within the constraints of the site being added prior to the search index being updated).

Don't give up yet webmasters and keep submitting to DMOZ.

Click to expand...

well yes, but only if your site has unique content, and suggest the site only once. Don't submit it 'every month', don't category or editor shop by trying different categories, just submit it once to the most appropriate category you can find. Reading category descriptions (where they exist) will help with placement.

:tree:

Designed originally for people to add their site and link for a web site, which is of value, informative and of general use to the visitor, early submitters of web sites misused the concept, hence a guideline for editors was introduced. Only problem now is the guidelines are so strict, it is nearly impossible to get a web site that fills the criteria mentioned above to be included.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's abusers from the last few years that are responsible for most of the strict guidelines we have, not early submitters. And the more abusers we get, the more restrictive we have to get. Still, it isn't impossible to get a web site listed that is "of value, informative, and of general use to the visitor" -- though your idea of value and ours may be completely at odds. Tons of sites get added every week.

Oh, democracy is still there. And we have the same problems we had from the beginning--the barbarian tyrants who want to enter by force, destroying the value of all around them.

So we have to have border guards -- as we always have -- and we do visa checking -- perhaps more than we used to do. We found that "Abdullah Gelignita" the suicide bomber calls himself "Al Geisler" (also "Dil Dynamo" and five hundred other names) on his forged passports.

Oddly enough, we've found that it is of no value to our valued honest immigrants OR our border guards to tell A.G. exactly how we picked him up at the border -- again.

You have a right to support A.G. or any other terrorist, pirate, robber baron, or mass murderer -- but you cannot expect us, their victims, to sympathize with your point of view.

The fact is, it has always been difficult, if not impossible, to get into the ODP if you don't have unique content -- if you know nothing, do nothing, create nothing, and merely want to charge other people money for obtruding on the shortest route between them and their customers (or vendors). In short, if you have no information and no skills but a shrill voice and a shameless conscience ... in short, a marketroid.

And the fact is that for at least the last five years we've been dealing with the -- well, call them what you like--whatever you call them this morning, it'll be a pejorative word by this afternoon.

On the other hand, if you have something worth saying, or you actually provide a unique and valuable service with your own hands and brain -- the ODP is still the easiest place to get listed. (And if you're using your own hands and brain, you almost by definition have a unique offering -- unless, that is, you're sharing that brain with several hundred other aliases of Abdullah.)

That's democracy, Attilla. One peasant who plants a few vegetables on his hardscrabble farm is worth all of your vicious mass murderers and serial rapists, Kublai. Or you can think of it as communism in action. The workers actually control the means of production, and the robber barons are outside in the cold, staring through the smoky factory windows and wondering what happened.

I slightly disagree with your comments “Mod Gimmster” and possibly quite a few other people will feel the same, who try to include a web site with informative, unique content and of general usage to others.

As an example www.boatstogo.co.uk and is now a leading player in its field, which has plenty of the above requirements, was put forward for inclusion in the correct category on several occasions, with a lengthy time period between each submittal.
It took over 1 year to be approved.

My original comment was as follows:

Spelling mistakes, grammar or poor layout within the context of a web site should not necessarily mean non-inclusion to the directory

You are quoted as saying “They don't. Lack of unique content does.”
The above web site has always had plenty of unique content from day one.

So in the case of the above site and many more, which I have submitted and which have taken over a year for inclusion, there must be some other reason I am unaware of that denies them access.

It is not a case of 'denied access' more a case of 'delayed review'.

Without reviewing all of the sites that are waiting there is no way of knowing what lies under the www address. Before we have the pleasure of finding that single content rich site full of uniqueness we have to review and then move 50 sites submitted to the wrong category, delete 20 mirrors, fix typo's in URL so we can actually view the sites, process and delete many updates that are simply to stuff the description with keywords and then.. maybe.. there will be enough free time left to actually list a site and write a nice guideline compliant title and description.

Editor WANT to list quality sites for our users but to do that we have to review each and every submission and this means that we get tied up dealing with all the rubbish along the way.

How do you know they are not just sitting in the category waiting to be reviewed? How do you know they have been denied access? Waiting is not denied access - it is waiting. Some sites wait for years. It is just the nature of a volunteer project. You might not like but it is a fact.

Also, just because an editor looked at your site does not necessarily mean they were even looking to list. When you are dealing with a large number of potential candidates for a listing human nature is to sometimes go on an exclusion run. If you don't have enough knowledge of the subject matter of the category you can usually help out the pile by going in deleting the spam and dead sites. This can involve an editor looking at your site, though it might be a perfect candidate for a listing, the editor might not be listing sites rather just trying to help reduce the pile. Food for thought.

Just to reiterate - we don't not list a site because of spelling - we look at unique content.

covkidhelp said:

The Open Directory Project (ODP), also known as DMOZ, produces a comprehensive directory of Web sites ...

Click to expand...

Not sure that this is true either. Quality, not quantity. ODP is not interested in listing all websites even if they aren’t spam. It seems to me anyway. I’m sure most sites submitted today are redundant in their content with regards to other sites already listed in the category they were submitted to. Unless the editor can find some obvious redeeming value that the public will benefit from, it won’t get listed.

_________________________________________
These are purely my thoughts and I do not represent the ODP. I could be wrong on all points.

I’m sure most sites submitted today are redundant in their content with regards to other sites already listed in the category they were submitted to. Unless the editor can find some obvious redeeming value that the public will benefit from, it won’t get listed.

Click to expand...

In terms of redundant content, most sites get listed. Sites that simply mirror other sites don't. In Games/, for example, most games only have a certain number of cheat codes. There may be 10 sites all listing the same cheat codes but it's very rare that any two sites have nothing but the same list. Most sites differ enough that they have something unique (i.e. listable).

Thanks for clarifying, jtaylorj.

Wait your turn

It's my opinion that it is very rude to ask a person to hurry up, when they are offering a free service.
There was a post, at the bottom of the ODP page, where I listed my site. It said "Last update Aug. 2002". I checked back every month. Two months ago the post said "Last update July 2004" My site was listed. It's a small category of little interest. People, wait your turn.
It's also my opinion that ODP should reject sites for poor spelling, grammer or layout. These items are very important to viewers or customers.

Kelkid

>It's also my opinion that ODP should reject sites for poor spelling, grammer or layout. These items are very important to viewers or customers.

We really prefer to focus on content here. A lot of perfectly competent accountants, programmers, plumbers, or realtors can't spell. And some sleazy spammers can.

I am also feeling very frustrated with the DMOZ. I have been trying and waiting for 6 months to get into the directory with not so much as a rejection or reply. I can't even really get any help. So today I decided to apply to be an editor as so many have suggested. I put in the application that I had been waiting to get my site listed and thought I could help get my sites listed as well as the other small businesses out there who are waiting. My application was rejected based on the list of most common reasons for an application to be rejected. I really did want to help but I wasn't acting completely altruistically, I really would like to have my site in the directory. The, I hate to use this word, excuse that it takes a long time for the human editors to complete the submission and they are short handed does not fly with me when they are rejecting applications.
thanks
cassandra

cassandra211 said:

I am also feeling very frustrated with the DMOZ. I have been trying and waiting for 6 months to get into the directory with not so much as a rejection or reply. I can't even really get any help. So today I decided to apply to be an editor as so many have suggested. I put in the application that I had been waiting to get my site listed and thought I could help get my sites listed as well as the other small businesses out there who are waiting.

Click to expand...

Have you asked for a status check on your submission in the Submission Status Thread? I don't see any posts (other than this one) from you. If not, perhaps you shoud check out the Request Submission Guidelines and follow them to see if someone can give you an update. I wonder why you feel you have not been able to obtain help when I cannot see where you have asked? Also you might want to read the Help Central information regarding site submission procedures and policies. Please note that there is never an automatic reply to submissions.

Applying to become an editor in order to get your sites listed is not a good idea. Any editor with permissions to edit in a higher catagory would be able to undo any improper edits made. An editor joining, making a handful of edits and timing out might make some one curious about the catagory, and next time a category editor visited to work on that particular catagory would correct any improper edits anyway.

Category editors do not review editor applications, so how quickly editor applications are either accepted or rejected is irrelevent to how a particular category gets edited. In the case of someone simply wanted become an editor to get their sites added and "really did want to help", probably (and this is just my opinion-I don't have access to editor applications or how they are processed)would reflect that in how their particular application was completed.

Thank you for you information. No, I had not asked for help as I didn't know where to go. Today was the first time I learned of this forum site and I got this link when i applied for editor. Believe me I know there are countless bad guys out there but I didn't know where else to go. Like I said I'm discouraged but this helps I'm am checking the site submission thread now.

Although I appreciate the original posters suggestion that we all keep our chins up and maybe we'll get our sites listed in the near future, I no longer have any positive expectations about DMoZ.

Our web design company has submitted 12 websites to DMoZ in the past 2 and a half years and none of them has been included in the directory, or even reviewed to date. They are all websites for clients of ours and they are all quality sites with good content.

I can't even begin to understand how an organization that has such a major impact on the listings for the largest search engine in the world can justify 2 year plus delays in simply reviewing submissions. Something is VERY wrong here and changes need to be made or ultimately companies that rely on the web for any significant portion of their business will eventually find a way to circumvent DMoZ / Google entirely.

If anyone can explain to me why we should calmy sit back with our fingers crossed, hoping that our sites will get listed by DMoZ for another 2 years, then I'm all ears. Otherwise you can count us among the hordes of dissatisfied people who will support any alternative to DMoZ that surfaces in the future.

I believe your real problem is not DMOZ. Your problem is Google. I don’t understand why DMOZ is guilty because is greatly appreciated by Google and used to build their web directory. Why don’t you ask Google to change their policy instead of launching threats here?

All the above is just my opinion.

Only problem now is the guidelines are so strict, it is nearly impossible to get a web site that fills the criteria mentioned above to be included.

Click to expand...

Come on, this is not the case. Are you talking about any particular category? Write some *content* and you'll get listed.

Incorrectly filling out, add URL form, unfortunately you will not be informed of this error, so you will wait to see if your site has been included, the only way to verify this is by joining the Dmoz forum and using up the valuable time of an ODP moderator.

Click to expand...

Why not take more time to just get it right? It's a simple web form. I'm sure this is not an issue to most submitters. Please apply a bit of QC yourself if you want an editor to look at your submission in his/her free time.

The editors only comments will be that of word for word text copied from the rules and guidelines which you have not adhered too.

Click to expand...

More likely not read.

Don't give up yet webmasters and keep submitting to DMOZ.

Click to expand...

Going slighly contrary to opinions expressed by other editors, I personally wouldn't mind if, after having re-read the guidelines, folks submitted again with a compliant title and description. Then if a few more pennies drop, submit again. No way you'll get penalized if you're acting in good faith. My opinion, mind...

It is not good to have so much power and influence over what should or should not be included in what is basically a public directory

Click to expand...

Nobody has any particular power or influence. Some editors have edit rights to many more sites than others and some editors even have edit rights over editors. But their actions are open to the scrutiny of all. It's not my idea of power anyway. Influence? Well you'll gain that through reputation and trust. Nothing wrong with that.

I am also convinced that within DMOZ there are some real hard working editors who joined because they have a genuine interest in fair play.

Click to expand...

Sure. It gets me how some categories have such long unreviewed queues. In many cases it's unreasonable. Categories can be named and shamed. Fair play? I'd go so far as to say most have their private interests in the mix. But all are working for free. They're contributing. Making an effort.

Editors possess varying experience, talent, and appetite for hard work. It is sometimes hard work. The unreviewed queues are living proof that folks will just not read/follow guidelines. But no editor will get away with unfair play for long.

Something is VERY wrong here

Click to expand...

It surely is because you appear to think that ODP has an obligation to webmasters and is severely letting them down.

If you take the trouble to read any of the voluminous documentation or previous postings here on this topic, you'll find that our prime mission is to build a decent directory of good quality content for use by surfers and downstream data users, not to provide a free listing service for webmasters. In many areas of interest, there's so much dross that we'd be better off if we disabled submissions entirely and relied on other means for finding good content.

Here's a little experiment for you.

• Pick any small town name you like.
• Google it.
• Ask yourself if the results tell you anything useful about the town.
• Once past item 100, maybe.
• Now go to the equivalent ODP category
• It may well not be complete, but what's there will have quality.

I can't comment on why your sites weren't listed because you've not mentioned their URLs. If they conform to the requirements of our submission guidelines which spell out the sort of sites we do and don't list, they might be in time.

If anyone can explain to me why we should calmy sit back with our fingers crossed, hoping that our sites will get listed by DMoZ for another 2 years, then I'm all ears.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't. Two years is not on. Look again and find out where you're going wrong. Over 95% (I'd like to say 99% however you'd say I was just talking for effect) of submissions I look at at are not guideline-compliant. Were you part of the couple of percent who make a decent submission, *twelve times*, but met such bad luck? Even in the case where sites are not guideline compliant it shouldn't take two years. Perhaps the category has a high level of spam and you're taking "collateral damage". Perhaps the editor just smells something. I shouldn't speculate. There are some troublesome categories though.

Editors want to add sites. They like *big* categories listed in their profiles. It's a human thing. They go out looking, nay scouring the web, for sites to add. You need to ask yourself why twelve of yours didn't get listed when you handed them on a plate.

Google? They have nothing to do with DMOZ. They choose to use DMOZ data. Probably because they like it. Because it's good.

"Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door" ...and Google and DMOZ won't be far behind.