DMOZ needs a Express submission service.

Kind of like how Yahoo does it.

Pay a few hundred dollars and get a priority review.

Seriously.. use the money to pay editors to edit. Get things moving around here.

We all have to agree that the current 2 minute - 2 year plus policy is utterly ridiculous.

Internet years are similar to dog years, to many things change in two years time.

I am not saying that this a solid buisness model but it's certainly foundation for a better system then the current one.

Hello,

I very much doubt that your suggestion of paid inclusion will ever happen, it's contrary to the mission/goal of DMOZ (ODP)....Remember that the ODP is a directory not a search engine.

Also something that people miss quite often is that you are not "submitting" a URL you are suggesting a site, that might then be reviewed by an editor to see if it's suitable for listing.

The span of the time frame is noted like you mentioned (2 minutes to 2 years) because there is really no way to give a more specific time frame due to the voluntary nature of the directory.



Note: If you do a search of these forums you will see this subject discussed many times.....

photofox said:

Hello,

I very much doubt that your suggestion of paid inclusion will ever happen, it's contrary to the mission/goal of DMOZ (ODP)....Remember that the ODP is a directory not a search engine.

Click to expand...

How is this contrary to the mission of DMOZ? Is the mission of DMOZ to maintian the slowest inclusion system as possible?

photofox said:

Also something that people miss quite often is that you are not "submitting" a URL you are suggesting a site, that might then be reviewed by an editor to see if it's suitable for listing.

Click to expand...

Exactly, I am paying a editor to review my suggested site ahead of time. I did not suggest a guaranteed listing.

photofox said:

The span of the time frame is noted like you mentioned (2 minutes to 2 years) because there is really no way to give a more specific time frame due to the voluntary nature of the directory.

Click to expand...

Again, a two year duration is ridiculous. A fine example on why the voluntary nature of the directory will fail over time with the rapid growth of the internet.

Maybe in 5 years we can change the policy to 5 minutes - 5 years, unless of course DMOZ decides to rush assigning voluntary editors which will ultimately result in Corruption of the directories.

photofox said:

Note: If you do a search of these forums you will see this subject discussed many times.....

Click to expand...

Which probably means it's a good idea..

Which probably means it's a good idea..

Click to expand...

Which means the idea has been rejected each time it came up because it's not a good idea by our criteria. Unfortunately bad ideas don't get better the more you post them...

senox said:

Which means the idea has been rejected each time it came up because it's not a good idea by our criteria. Unfortunately bad ideas don't get better the more you post them...

Click to expand...

Your post carried so much substance that it convinced me otherwise.. NOT

What is exactly is your "Criteria"?

Hi again,

You seem to be under the impression that the editorial staff and utlimately DMOZ is here is serve webmasters...That's another misconception, the ODP is here to serve web users. Of course webmasters are also web-users but for the most part when people complain about listing times they have their webmaster hat on...

You might want to take a read over http://dmoz.org/help/submit.html and http://dmoz.org/help/geninfo.html to get more information on the mission of the ODP.

But here is a quote related to your original suggestion:

Does the ODP have an express submit service that will get my site listed quicker?

The ODP does not have an express service similar to other commercial directories however, there are several things you can do to help expedite review of your submission. First, follow the submission guidelines carefully.
Secondly, you may want to review some of our editorial policies that the editors use to list sites. A well-written, thoughtful submission has a greater chance of getting reviewed sooner than a sloppy, careless one.

Click to expand...

How is this contrary to the mission of DMOZ? Is the mission of DMOZ to maintian the slowest inclusion system as possible?

Click to expand...

No, but part of our mission is to remain free (free to suggest to, free to use) so you can see how asking for fees would cause us some trouble there.

How 2 do it...

Locate Category
Find Editor
Find Editor's Website
WHOIS Domain
Get Address
Send Chocolates & URL
Await Inclusion

photofox said:

Hi again,

You seem to be under the impression that the editorial staff and utlimately DMOZ is here is serve webmasters...That's another misconception, the ODP is here to serve web users. Of course webmasters are also web-users but for the most part when people complain about listing times they have their webmaster hat on...

You might want to take a read over http://dmoz.org/help/submit.html and http://dmoz.org/help/geninfo.html to get more information on the mission of the ODP.

But here is a quote related to your original suggestion:

Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with speeding up the process and making everybody happy. Thats the only thing I am suggesting. Web surfers would most likely appreciate getting a site sooner then two years after the conception, do you not agree?

Plus having a system of paid reviewers will cut down on editor abuse. As the old saying goes "You get what you pay for"

I am not suggesting that all DMOZ editors are corrupt but it's a well known fact in the webmaster community that many people become editors so they can list sites with ease.

Anyway.. apparently I am wasting my breath. But there will be a day when DMOZ will evolve to something similar that I am mentioning

idleplay said:

Locate Category
Find Editor
Find Editor's Website
WHOIS Domain
Get Address
Send Chocolates & URL
Await Inclusion

Click to expand...

Contact editor, setup back wire or tranfer funds through paypal

I am only playing.. I wouldn't bribe a editor

On a serious note - The ODP is syndicated so much, because of exactly what it is, as it stands - a human edited directory in which sites are manually reviewed and selected for inclusion by unbiased individuals.

If paid submission was brought in, this would go out of the window, people wouldn't syndicate which in turn would make you reconsider listing here in the first place.

idleplay said:

On a serious note - The ODP is syndicated so much, because of exactly what it is, as it stands - a human edited directory in which sites are manually reviewed and selected for inclusion by unbiased individuals.

If paid submission was brought in, this would go out of the window, people wouldn't syndicate which in turn would make you reconsider listing here in the first place.

Click to expand...

Sorry, your post makes no sense. Why wouldn't people syndicate towards a faster more efficient system?

Web content being displayed fresher, weeding out corrupt volunteer editors ( Again no offense to the many honest ones)

You guys act like the current system is some perfectly carved gem.. I got news for you, there is always room for improvement.

Anyway, I said all I have to say regarding this matter.

We're not saying the ODP is perfect the way it is. What we are saying is that going the way of paid submissions is counter to the way the ODP is run. *That* is why the suggestion keeps getting rejected. Read some of those old threads if you want to know more about why.

Yeah, so I guess Google should have syndicated the Yahoo! directory instead.

I'm all for a quicker, faster review system sure - i'm not for a directory containing 100,000's of companies with big bank accounts. People syndicate dmoz because they know it's quality, carefully reviewed content. Not content from a company who spends thousands submitting hit and miss websites.

Yeah, there is room for improvement but I don't think paid submissions is the way to go... and besides, I can't afford it

Forgot to add, it's 1:30am, vintage coronation street on plus, vintage vera, percy sugden, ivy, the lot! classic!

Plus having a system of paid reviewers will cut down on editor abuse. As the old saying goes "You get what you pay for"

Click to expand...

IMO, it would increase editor abuse. A huge percentage of the current, experienced editors would resign, new editors would often be joining with a financial rather than altruistic motivation, and would not want to make the tough editorial decisions that might result in reduced revenues.

If the editors don't get paid, how many editors are going to hang around and work so that some AOL/TW suit can get richer.

If the editors do get paid: first, it is not enough and I want a raise. Second: want to see how fast I can dump 1,000 sites in the directory? They may be crapola, but if I'm getting paid.........

Hopefully you see the point.

Any analysis at all will reveal that a paid-review system must be inherently less efficient than a volunteer-driven system.

The overhead of pulling trusted editors off of useful, valued work to oversee untrusted editors doing piecework, the morale collapse as volunteers felt their work had been devalued because other people, doing less valuable work more poorly nonetheless received pay, the enormous overhead of establishing a whole new customer service for this completely new and alien class of customers, the loss in motivation as what used to offer an altruistic community seemed (whether accurately or not) to have gone over to the pimps.....

No, there's no way on earth that a commercial system could be anything like as efficient as the ODP. If such a thing were possible, I have faith that Yahoo -- with its experience and its reputation -- would be it.

It isn't, and we certainly aren't arrogant enough to think we could do better what Yahoo does.

If you think you could do better than both Yahoo and the ODP -- go try. You'll either learn taxonomy and management, or you'll learn humility, or you'll learn about hubris and its consequences.

Any of these possibilities would be good for the world. Good luck! The web needs more perspectives.

idleplay said:

Locate Category
Find Editor
Find Editor's Website
WHOIS Domain
Get Address
Send Chocolates & URL
Await Inclusion

Click to expand...

Not completely correct.
Most possible last action will be
"Get Banned forever"

hmm, how about beer and crips?

We are very picky about bribing. Even talking or asking questions about it in the way you do here is seen be us as a ver BAD :thumb1: thing to do.
We don't like it and we don't like jokes about it.

Stop being soft. I was only having a joke.