Hi. I wonder why these forums, which are very important resources for a great project, are not announced so that many webmasters learn about ODP! Is there some reason? I see posts from 2002 so the forums are not very young. Yet only some people know about them!
Hidden Forums?
- Thread starter Lordo
- Start date
dogbows
Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,446
Anyone who suggests a site to the ODP directory would know about the R-Z forums, if they read the guidelines before suggesting their site, which they have to proclaim that they have read them before hitting that submit button. However, many still do not read them.
So, it could be a way to know if they read the guidelines or not 
But I still beleive ODP should announce the forums. People do not usually read agreements or guidelines but most of them enjoy browsing forums. These forums could improve webmasters' interaction with ODP.
But I still beleive ODP should announce the forums. People do not usually read agreements or guidelines but most of them enjoy browsing forums. These forums could improve webmasters' interaction with ODP.
dogbows
Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,446
Then there is a lesson to learn in all this, right?
If the webmasters read the guidelines as they say they do, most of them would not need the interaction. It is always best to read the guidelines before submitting to any directory or search engine. And it is especially important to read the guidelines before posting in any forum.
If the webmasters read the guidelines as they say they do, most of them would not need the interaction. It is always best to read the guidelines before submitting to any directory or search engine. And it is especially important to read the guidelines before posting in any forum.
You are right. I just received an email after the confirmation and it says:
If you have questions, please visit the public forums at http://resource-zone.com/ to talk with one of our volunteers.
If you have questions, please visit the public forums at http://resource-zone.com/ to talk with one of our volunteers.
Very few editors come to this forum - maybe a dozen or so regulars - it is not the most popular job because very few submitters actually understand what DMOZ is all about and it can get very frustrating. I am not sure there is capacity to handle any more enquiries so it may not be a good thing to publicise it. Those that are interested enough will find their way here eventually. If there were to be a big increase in enquiries then I suspect that some features might have to go or become more restricted.
Thanks for your informative reply, oneeye.
On the other hand, such project will not stay at the same size forever. It should grow up with time and web changes. And these forums are not only for checking submission status, they are for sharing ideas on how to enhance and develope ODP as well. And for this, you need webmasters and visitors to join the discussion.
If more enquiries means more restriction, what is the problem? More inquiries mean more attention for ODP and more publicity I think.
On the other hand, such project will not stay at the same size forever. It should grow up with time and web changes. And these forums are not only for checking submission status, they are for sharing ideas on how to enhance and develope ODP as well. And for this, you need webmasters and visitors to join the discussion.
If more enquiries means more restriction, what is the problem? More inquiries mean more attention for ODP and more publicity I think.
The problem is that "submittal status" enquiries take time away from the ODP mission, but contributing nothing to the project itself. (Occasionally we can use them as an opportunity to help people understand what the ODP is all about (and it is of course not submittals.) And that, we hope, helps fend off misguided suggestions about making the ODP more about submittals. (Since the real crying need, in order to build a good directory, is to put less emphasis on submittals.)
And, not surprisingly, we really aren't short of ideas about enhancing the ODP. Each editor has enough to keep him as busy as he wants to be -- and we have internal forums that do a very good job of discussing constructive suggestions.
I think we see the forum more as a way of explaining the ODP's purpose and practice, in hopes of getting more of the kind of help we want (people who may want to edit, people who'll do quality control reviews, and yes, even people who want to suggest sites) and less of the kind of help we don't need (alas, mostly people who want to use the ODP to promote their own self-interest by submitting value-siphoning websites.) And, of course, we hope it will help people set realistic expectations about what the ODP is likely to do for them as webmasters (which is an accidental and insignificant side-effect of its real mission.)
And, not surprisingly, we really aren't short of ideas about enhancing the ODP. Each editor has enough to keep him as busy as he wants to be -- and we have internal forums that do a very good job of discussing constructive suggestions.
I think we see the forum more as a way of explaining the ODP's purpose and practice, in hopes of getting more of the kind of help we want (people who may want to edit, people who'll do quality control reviews, and yes, even people who want to suggest sites) and less of the kind of help we don't need (alas, mostly people who want to use the ODP to promote their own self-interest by submitting value-siphoning websites.) And, of course, we hope it will help people set realistic expectations about what the ODP is likely to do for them as webmasters (which is an accidental and insignificant side-effect of its real mission.)
Thanks for the reply, hutcheson.
I agree the forum is more like a way of explaining the ODP's purpose and practice. And I agree each editor has enough to keep him as busy as he wants to be. My point is: you still need to hear from webmasters and visitors (each use ODP in a different way). ODP forums are not only about submitting sites and being editor requests, as you said, and you need dynamic people to give ideas and discuss differnet issues of ODP itself. Simply, because neither visitors nor webmasters read long text but they can write in forums.
I agree the forum is more like a way of explaining the ODP's purpose and practice. And I agree each editor has enough to keep him as busy as he wants to be. My point is: you still need to hear from webmasters and visitors (each use ODP in a different way). ODP forums are not only about submitting sites and being editor requests, as you said, and you need dynamic people to give ideas and discuss differnet issues of ODP itself. Simply, because neither visitors nor webmasters read long text but they can write in forums.
You know how it goes: all the world desperately needs people who will take the trouble to inform themselves (even if it involves repetitions of the R-act) before they try to share their knowledge.
What all the world gets, all too often, is: PHB's(*) and PHB-wannabe's. The ODP, designed as it is to operate completely without B's (let alone B's with PH) is not a congenial place for PHB's or PHBWB's.
We need to find those readers! Odd how the system coheres, isn't it? Or ... is it? the ODP has built the largest human-edited directory in the solar system; there MUST be a coherent strategy in there somewhere. You think?
Understand the coherent strategy. Read, if you have to. (Most people do.) Then, if you agree with the strategy, we can talk tactics constructively.
And if you don't: you're a webmaster, you can implement your own strategy on your own website. (Ain't freedom wonderful?)
------------------------------------------------
(*) You'd think 19 out of 20 system suggestions come right off of Dilbert comic strips, and most of the others would make a strip if we'd send them to Mr. Adams. It would save everyone's time if people would just give their ideas directly to Scott at dilbert.com.
What all the world gets, all too often, is: PHB's(*) and PHB-wannabe's. The ODP, designed as it is to operate completely without B's (let alone B's with PH) is not a congenial place for PHB's or PHBWB's.
We need to find those readers! Odd how the system coheres, isn't it? Or ... is it? the ODP has built the largest human-edited directory in the solar system; there MUST be a coherent strategy in there somewhere. You think?
Understand the coherent strategy. Read, if you have to. (Most people do.) Then, if you agree with the strategy, we can talk tactics constructively.
And if you don't: you're a webmaster, you can implement your own strategy on your own website. (Ain't freedom wonderful?)
------------------------------------------------
(*) You'd think 19 out of 20 system suggestions come right off of Dilbert comic strips, and most of the others would make a strip if we'd send them to Mr. Adams. It would save everyone's time if people would just give their ideas directly to Scott at dilbert.com.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Messages
- 5,872
Don't know what an R-act is. A PHB is a Pointy-Haired Boss, which is shorthand for "managerial-type person who has no clue about what the people they boss around are actually doing". It's from Dilbert, where the boss of the computer company has pointy hair and knows absolutely nothing about computers, programming or technology, but is impressed by long words.
Alucard
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 5,920
One of the things that I have picked up from being "on the inside' of the ODp for a few years is the nature of the beast, and why the editors sometimes come across the way they do.
There is a very strong, focused Vision of what the ODP should be. It's is laid out in the the various charters which are public. It's quite restrictive (which I see as a huge plus, because it helps retain the focus), and not very flexible. most editors feel very passionately about this vision, and will defend it, if challenged.
So the issue we have with "suggestions for improvement" is that usually this involves changing the underlying nature of what the ODP is. This is not something that the people that signed up to the project really want to happen.
If someone believes that this vision of what the ODP is trying to do is flawed, then they are welcome to do it better by starting up another project. If it really is better, then editors and users will come flocking to it and the ODP will die a natural death as it naturally becomes irrelevant.
The thing is - there have been quite a few who have tried, and, as yet, I don't feel they have succeeded. I feel that this, in and of itself, helps show that, while not perfect, the ODP is the best there is out there right now.
On other forums I have seen ODP editors referred to as "arrogant" - this is often a charge that is levelled at people with vision when they won't bend to the wills of others, and design to the lowest common demoninator. I see it as reaffirming the strength of the vision - keeping the ODP doing what it is intended to do. The fact that this seems to directly clash with webmaster's and SEO's ideas of what the internet should be must not bother us - we are really not there for these people.
All that having been said, there have been one or two good suggestions made on the forum which have been taken and discussed in the internal editor's fora (which is where most editors stay in touch with what is going on with the ODP - only a few come here). But the majority are just "why won't you change the ODP to make it do what I want it to. Those, of course, are of limited value, because they clash directly with the vision. if someone wants to be constructive, and really try to "get" what the ODP is about, in order to make some suggestions, then they are more than welcome to, of course (but then I would say that, if they truly understand what the ODP is about, they should become editors )
There is a very strong, focused Vision of what the ODP should be. It's is laid out in the the various charters which are public. It's quite restrictive (which I see as a huge plus, because it helps retain the focus), and not very flexible. most editors feel very passionately about this vision, and will defend it, if challenged.
So the issue we have with "suggestions for improvement" is that usually this involves changing the underlying nature of what the ODP is. This is not something that the people that signed up to the project really want to happen.
If someone believes that this vision of what the ODP is trying to do is flawed, then they are welcome to do it better by starting up another project. If it really is better, then editors and users will come flocking to it and the ODP will die a natural death as it naturally becomes irrelevant.
The thing is - there have been quite a few who have tried, and, as yet, I don't feel they have succeeded. I feel that this, in and of itself, helps show that, while not perfect, the ODP is the best there is out there right now.
On other forums I have seen ODP editors referred to as "arrogant" - this is often a charge that is levelled at people with vision when they won't bend to the wills of others, and design to the lowest common demoninator. I see it as reaffirming the strength of the vision - keeping the ODP doing what it is intended to do. The fact that this seems to directly clash with webmaster's and SEO's ideas of what the internet should be must not bother us - we are really not there for these people.
All that having been said, there have been one or two good suggestions made on the forum which have been taken and discussed in the internal editor's fora (which is where most editors stay in touch with what is going on with the ODP - only a few come here). But the majority are just "why won't you change the ODP to make it do what I want it to. Those, of course, are of limited value, because they clash directly with the vision. if someone wants to be constructive, and really try to "get" what the ODP is about, in order to make some suggestions, then they are more than welcome to, of course (but then I would say that, if they truly understand what the ODP is about, they should become editors
)Arrogance? What's arrogance?
Arrogance is walking into a kitchen full of people making soup, when you've never boiled water, and telling them how to do it.
Arrogance is walking into a roomful of people making soup, and ordering them to start making pizza, because YOU don't like soup.
Arrogance is walking up to the head of the line in a soup kitchen and demanding better service immediately, because YOU'RE a "multi-million dollar business" and "get better service at the Hilton down the street."
Arrogance is walking into a soup kitchen and asking the waiters to stop serving soup and go out and survey the city to see how long it would take to serve everyone, if everyone came.
Arrogance is breaking into the soup line and whining at the waiters who tell you to take your turn.
Arrogance is claiming you deserve immediate service because someone else just got served.
Arrogance is going into a charity hospital and telling the doctors if they can't keep you alive for another 200 years, they should be fired and replaced by marketing experts.
Arrogance is going into a charity hospital and telling them their free cafeteria service isn't up to your standards,
Arrogance is going into a charity hospital at midnight on a saturday night under a full moon immediately after a terrorist attack, claiming your ingrown toenail should get emergency room treatment because someone else got treated for an ingrown toenail last month.
But brushing off arrogant jerks ISN'T arrogance. It's a public service.
Arrogance is walking into a kitchen full of people making soup, when you've never boiled water, and telling them how to do it.
Arrogance is walking into a roomful of people making soup, and ordering them to start making pizza, because YOU don't like soup.
Arrogance is walking up to the head of the line in a soup kitchen and demanding better service immediately, because YOU'RE a "multi-million dollar business" and "get better service at the Hilton down the street."
Arrogance is walking into a soup kitchen and asking the waiters to stop serving soup and go out and survey the city to see how long it would take to serve everyone, if everyone came.
Arrogance is breaking into the soup line and whining at the waiters who tell you to take your turn.
Arrogance is claiming you deserve immediate service because someone else just got served.
Arrogance is going into a charity hospital and telling the doctors if they can't keep you alive for another 200 years, they should be fired and replaced by marketing experts.
Arrogance is going into a charity hospital and telling them their free cafeteria service isn't up to your standards,
Arrogance is going into a charity hospital at midnight on a saturday night under a full moon immediately after a terrorist attack, claiming your ingrown toenail should get emergency room treatment because someone else got treated for an ingrown toenail last month.
But brushing off arrogant jerks ISN'T arrogance. It's a public service.
longcall911
Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2004
- Messages
- 106
This brief, clear statement explains a great deal over which I've often scratched my head.Alucard]. . . So the issue we have with "suggestions for improvement" is that usually this involves changing the underlying nature of what the ODP [i]is[/i said:
Thanks for the insight.