Humans Don't do it better.
- Thread starter andyboy
- Start date
Back in April when I said "Discussions of specific sites are inappropriate in this forum." The fact that we keep removing your URL from your posts should have underlined that.
Not here. Suggesting your site, which you appear to have done more than often enough judging by your earlier comments, is how you get your site evaluated by an editor.
What's so wrong about asking for a re-evaluation.
I mean ur reply 'Not Here' wasn't much help, so I thought I go to the right forum and ask for a re-evaluation.
Actually it pretty much is if u read their so called social contract.
Anyways, I got my own directory forums myself, and we have quite a few of these dmoz discussions there too.
What's wrong is that this isn't the place to do that and you keep ignoring that fact.
Why did you think you'd get a different response by posting the same thing in another forum here? Not quite sure I get the logic behind that.
Actually, no, it pretty much isn't. The fact that we list sites does not make us a listing service. "Listing service" implies that we exist for and have an obligation to web site owners, and we don't.
I think that there is something wrong with the way ur comprehending what I'm doing.
Honest to god.
Maybe its a perceptual thing.
This is pretty much the first time I asked for a re-evaluation and that's after we did some major work on our site.
U said no, so I go to another forum and take my business there.
I guess that was too much for u to swallow.
birdie said:
Well Hello...
Im one off those notorious directory owners he must be speaking off
We are a paid review directory network (Not Free) but i have never left anyone out in the
cold longer then 2 days since ive started and actually Fix errors in submissions as well as
offer them Deep links and add them myself if they havent...
Hes not lying as thiers many editors and owners at "Digital Point" whom take pride in what they do whether FREE or Paid Review.
The difference is that DMOZ get thousands of sites to review where others get a few hundred daily which
helps get the process rolling faster.
thx
malcolm
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Messages
- 5,872
That sounds like the kind of service you'd want if you paid $500, yes.
(But comparing that sort of professional listing service with what dmoz.org does is comparing apples and armadillos - what you do and what we do is not at all related. Which is the whole point, of course.)
nea said:That sounds like the kind of service you'd want if you paid $500, yes.
(But comparing that sort of professional listing service with what dmoz.org does is comparing apples and armadillos - what you do and what we do is not at all related. Which is the whole point, of course.)
Wow thats a pretty steep price...
never heard of any premium directory that would charge so much...
Im a directory owner as well as an editor..
Relevance is what it is and thiers no substitions for it.
We accept quality listings much like you as well as
reject many submissions that are not up to standards
Dmoz is a free directory with a much larger database and thousands
of editors with different taste in submissions... Nothing more nothing less
Other then that theirs no difference between them as they perform the same functions...
thx
malcolm
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Messages
- 5,872
That's the figure quoted in the message you replied to. I have no idea since I'm not in the web marketing business at all.
No, there is a large conceptual difference. You perform a service for webmasters. You charge them a price and list their site in your directory, to increase the visibility of their site. For their sake.
The ODP doesn't do that. Some editors enjoy finding small obscure businesses and giving them more web exposure which is fine insofar as it's done within the framework of the guidelines, but providing a marketing channel for web site owners is not what the ODP is about at all. We do this for the sake of the web surfer, the person looking for information - not the person who provides it. The business or web site owner, or the SEO professional, is not our customer and we don't perform any service for them. Most of our listings (at least in some areas of the directory) are sites whose owners never suggested them to the directory, and probably never will know that the site is listed with us.
And again - this is the whole point. You do your thing and we do our thing. If we did the same thing, there would be less diversity on the web, and diversity is what we all want. Right?
I think what you ought to do is get rid of your social contract & come out clean and tell the world what dmoz really is.
I mean ur editors either don't know or don't want to spot quality sites, and if u look at this thread, one of ur editors which gave me a reason for not listing my directory, I quickly rebutted, cause he made a mistake and corrected him.
Now if he were getting financial gain or if it were one of his friends site, I bet you he wouldn't of found any flaws in it.
I also gave a few urls in dmoz which were listed which were under construction, which you removed.
What you have done is create a financial framework for editors to supplement their income one way or another. They just find their own little ways of how to profit from being a dmoz editor.
3 features alone on our site are not to be found anywhere on the internet, cause they are proprietary and people love them to death.
I'm sure Motsa's gonna jump in and give me his famous words of 'were not talking bout 1 site here' but I know for a fact that I present a site of extremely high quality, not found on entire the internet of over 40 Million Sites.
Well, you go to ur social contract and read over it and read the types of sites which dmoz is interested to list in their directory.
Anyways, were in the web 2.0 era now, and there are alot of other ways to drive traffic to my site.
Like I said, I have my own directory & webmaster community, and we have alot of these discussions over there already.
And don't you think having quality sites in your directory will benefit the web surfer?
Have you done an analysis of your traffic to see how many people come to dmoz to look & search for resources as opposed to submitting their site?
Have you seperated the traffic which you get from editor & admin traffic and come up with a difference to get your actual visitor or surfer traffic?
Have you graphed the trends to see where its leading to?
Out of 40 people I know which are not webmasters, most of them don't even know what dmoz is, let alone to come & surf for websites in it.
Have you made an actual count of web surfers for which you've got 75,000 editors servicing, to see how many there are.
I THINK YOUR LYING
It's not for the sake of web surfers, site owners, etc, etc, etc.
It's for the sake of only & only building a directory.
You should get rid of your submission form then I guess. It doesn't serve much purpose if its basically going to be ignored. Maybe it's just best that your editors go out and find sites on their own then.
Adnan
chaos127
Curlie Admin
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2003
- Messages
- 1,344
If you do have evidence that this is going on, then please report it at http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/ and it will be investigated. As I'm sure you know, using an ODP editor account for personal gain in the way you suggest is against our guidelines, and will result in the removal of said account when discovered. If you do not have any evidence, then I would suggest that you avoid making sweeping allegations of this sort in public. Yes, there are bound to be some people who try and abuse the system, but claiming that this applies to the majority (or even a significant proportion) of active editors is a long way from the truth.
Of course we do. But what is the best way to find those sites and prioritise resources into listing them? There are inevitably lots of quality sites that are not yet listed in the directory. Some of them will have been suggested by their owners or the general public via our "suggest site" feature. A lot of rubbish will also have been suggested, and a lot of high quality sites will never have been suggested at all. What we do is to allow volunteers to work (subject to sufficient experience and expertise to be trusted to work there) on whichever parts of the directory interest them the most, and allow them to add sites either from the pile of public suggestions or by going out and searching themselves. Do you have any better suggestions?
Actually yes I do,
If you go over my thread, I have been pretty persistent because I know that my site is a very high quality site.
I mean we spent months programming, designing & optimizing this thing.
I suggested this thing a few times, before the dmoz data crash, and don't know if it was ever evaluated or not.
Then I applied for an editor only & only to list my site, and stated on the application & was denied.
Now what I have done is submitted my site again, in that growing pile of yours where editors will have to sift thru what is quality & what is rubbish. Most of it will be rubbish, and alot of it will be stuff which has been submitted before so your editors already start on the 'watch out' node.
I think you should give my site a re-evaluation and come up with a method where people which have genuinely good sites to have a way where they can get their site re-evaluated.
jimnoble
DMOZ Meta
That sounds as though you want us to tell volunteer editors what to do. Ain't gonna happen and here's why.
Any editors who are interested in working the category to which you've suggested your website are already doing so. The editors who aren't, aren't. Volunteers who are told what to do tend to just melt away and do nothing at all.
With several thousand editors all working away in areas that interest them, it could be said that the editor workforce is a fair sample of the web surfer community as a whole. If no editors are interested in your chosen category, maybe John Surfer isn't either.
Seems to me that you're looking for a paid directory which provides a service in a timely manner to website owners. There are quite a few about, but we aren't one of them.
Added:
I checked your directory for pet stores. The single result isn't one.
I also looked at history - just three results.
Finally, speaking as a seasoned surfer, I found the need to scroll down and then click to a different page to see the non-sponsored results pretty frustrating.
Any editors who are interested in working the category to which you've suggested your website are already doing so. The editors who aren't, aren't. Volunteers who are told what to do tend to just melt away and do nothing at all.
With several thousand editors all working away in areas that interest them, it could be said that the editor workforce is a fair sample of the web surfer community as a whole. If no editors are interested in your chosen category, maybe John Surfer isn't either
.Seems to me that you're looking for a paid directory which provides a service in a timely manner to website owners. There are quite a few about, but we aren't one of them.
Added:
I checked your directory for pet stores. The single result isn't one.
I also looked at history - just three results.
Finally, speaking as a seasoned surfer, I found the need to scroll down and then click to a different page to see the non-sponsored results pretty frustrating.
Actually he asked me for a suggestion and I gave it.
Actually did u try searching for pet stores in the portal.
Have u seen the type of search that we have implemented in our directory anywhere else on the internet?
How many portals offer you the convenience of searching for sites from specific tlds'?
Did u think that our search & polls are not part of our portal? You think people don't or wouldn't be interested in seeing the content there?
Did u try running a tld query like mortgate information .uk
Your just thinking on a a single dimension and forgetting the complete picture by telling me that you couldn't find a listing for pet stores or telling me u had to flip a page, while when I search, I get 2 results which actually are pet stores..
How many sites have you seen on the internet which have polls like ours?
I think that lies the problem in dmoz editors.
They are not able to look at complete pictures, and are looking at specific stuff and coming to a decision.
I think, try to look in the view of a surfer or a browser which comes to our site and try to perceive what he finds jimnoble.
Funny how you keep bringing everything back to your site. The long and short of it is that, if your site is listable, then I'm sure someone will list it eventually. You can write and write until your fingers cramp here and that won't make that happen any more quickly.
At the risk of beating a dead horse here, there are several key things about the ODP that you (that's a general "you") need to understand:
No web site owner likes to hear that the category where their site should be listed isn't of sufficient interest to an editor for someone to keep the category completely up-to-date but it's the way it is. While we accept new editors regularly, existing editors leave for a variety of reasons as well. 75,000 is the total number of editors there have ever been, not the number of currently active editors. And active editors edit where they want to.
At the risk of beating a dead horse here, there are several key things about the ODP that you (that's a general "you") need to understand:
- Editors choose how much time they want to spend doing ODP-related tasks and which tasks they want to spend that time doing.
- Editors choose which categories they want to edit in; they are not required to edit in any particular if they choose not to, even editalls and meta editors.
- The only job an editor has is to leave a category and/or the ODP itself a better place than when they got there. That might mean cleaning up existing listings or it might mean adding sites they've found on their own or it might mean going through the pool of suggested sites. As long as the net result is to the benefit of the directory, then it's all good.
- The site suggestion pool is just one place, and not necessarily the best one in many categories, that editors may go to in order to find listable sites.
No web site owner likes to hear that the category where their site should be listed isn't of sufficient interest to an editor for someone to keep the category completely up-to-date but it's the way it is. While we accept new editors regularly, existing editors leave for a variety of reasons as well. 75,000 is the total number of editors there have ever been, not the number of currently active editors. And active editors edit where they want to.
jimnoble
DMOZ Meta
All I did was look at the pet store and history categories. The user interface presumably isn't as intuitive as I thought it was.