Is DMOZ to be more important than any other SE/Directory

We are now witnessing the largest changes in how searches are converted into URL listings than ever before.
When the dust settles and the major SE's all start to fall in line with AI (Artificial Intellegence) How do the DMOZ editors see their role?
Example, the forums are awash with 'SEO is over', I won't bore you with the threads as they are long and full of many differing views. Certain SEO's are seeing their sites vanish from Google, sandbagging topics abound.
What I see is going to happen is long overdue in any case. We are going to get search results based purely on the Contents and Service provided by the URL Company/Webmaster. If my statcounter knows who has visited me, then the SE has their e-mail address and my information is that the SE's are going to ask for 'site feedback' (more spam?) ' Did you enjoy your visit, how was the service etc etc. We will start to see * ratings per site, many already use this, we will start to see regional ratings (hence Googles 'Near to You').
So when DMOZ Editors are asked to review a site, their comments could make or break a site, depending on one crucial matter, will they know the subject matter at length? This also means that SE's will in them selves become more like Directories on given subjects. ie my keywords are Right to Buy and about a hundred others, then I envisage a search word Directory will appear on the screen 'Did you mean Right to Buy Council Houses? Diamonds etc. The sites with good content, recent updates and general user friendliness will score higher.

DMOZ bills itself as:
the largest, most comprehensive human-edited directory of the Web. It is constructed and maintained by a vast, global community of volunteer editors.

If that is of value to other web-based tools, then that is a useful side-effect. No more than that.

'SEO is over',

Click to expand...

If this would be true I think a lot of ODP editors will be very happy.
Although not all SEO firms are bad (there are even some very good ones) a lot of so called SEO experts are major spammers of ODP and SE's.

What I see is going to happen is long overdue in any case

Click to expand...

I totaly agree (as an editor and as being a webmaster myself).

when DMOZ Editors are asked to review a site, their comments could make or break a site

Click to expand...

This is a major misunderstanding already. We list sites conform our guidelines. What other sites do with this information is totaly up to them. But the influence of ODP on SE results is a big exaggeration.

The sites with good content, recent updates and general user friendliness will score higher.

Click to expand...

I can't wait until sites with good and uptodate content will be the primary search results. And preferably with Unique content of their Own. Ahh wait. Such a directory is already available

when DMOZ Editors are asked to review a site, their comments could make or break a site

Click to expand...

Just to clarify on the comments thing.

We describe what sites offer in terms of their function/content etc. These descriptions should never contain opinion - as we don't rate sites. (Except insofar as we reject them for having insufficient content.)

So whilst the content of the site should be reflected in the description - the quality of that content should not be.

I am aware there are listings that are non-compliant in this respect (mainly where an editor has failed to remove hype from a submission) but if you find any please feel free to point them out in the quality control/abuse forum here - or submit an update request for that listing.

Kind Regards,

Andy

Thanks, but you are ALL missing the point of my post.
Just suppose that you are asked to review a site that contains incorrect information. Do you search the subject matter through forums or SE's, or do you entirely rely upon the site as put to you?

The editor makes whatever checks of a site's validity seem appropriate. And that is really all that is appropriate to say in public -- malicious spammers ARE among the listening.

Do you know of sites with ODP listings, that you believe contain false (fraudulent) information? (If so, we'd be happy to re-check.) Or do you know of sites that were rejected because of putatively false but actually true information?

Our product is public, and we want it to be as free of fraudulent listings as possible.

Hi, actually this has been mentioned before, and it would not be fair to go over this in Open Forum. If you would be so kind as to e-mail me at
ctabuk@gmail.com I will give you the facts Thank You David

Send a private forum message.

Hi,Actually this matter has indeed been taken up by the UK Government, I had to do a report on Financial Services Companies and my results are being looked at as you read this. Thanks All David

Google, according to my information, Google is dropping DMOZ as a source of 'relative sites for inclusion'. If this were to happen ( I suggest you look at www.allsearchengines.co.uk as a point of reference, No Google) how would it effect this organisation.

We might finally stop being spammed to death! Although our imminent demise when the google directory was moved off googles front page seems not to have slowed down the spam suggestions, nor come to fruition.
:tree:

Spammers think of the ODP only as another conduit to spam Google. But the ODP's vision existed, and its first half-million edits were all done, before Google appeared. Google is a licensee -- so long as they want to be. Beyond that, it has nothing to do with the "organization" -- which is, by the way, an astonishingly inappropriate word for anything so deliberately chaotic as the ODP community.

If it were to happen, I think the good points would much outweigh the bad.
We'd probably get fewer applications from people who wanted to become editors. (Bad.)
Those who applied would probably be more likely to be genuinely interested in the directory, as there would be fewer people who applied just to get their site included. (Good.)
Existing editors would get less hassle from site owners. (Excellent.)
We'd get fewer site suggestions of good sites as people would not suggest sites through Google. (Bad.)
We'd get much, much less spam. (Good.)
Editors would have more time to seek out the good sites because of getting less spam. (Very good!)

That's my own predictions which may very well be completely wrong. But there is another side to the whole Google directory thing as well: while I of course think that DMOZ is the best place to get your directory data from, I also don't think it's a good thing if everybody uses the same directory data. One of the main points about the ODP is to encourage diversity, after all.

hutcheson said:

Spammers think of the ODP only as another conduit to spam Google. But the ODP's vision existed, and its first half-million edits were all done, before Google appeared. Google is a licensee -- so long as they want to be. Beyond that, it has nothing to do with the "organization" -- which is, by the way, an astonishingly inappropriate word for anything so deliberately chaotic as the ODP community.

Click to expand...

'Organ' a natural or vital operation : a means of comminication or the conveying information or opinions from one to another of two parties'

Do you not use http://www.ifccfbi.gov/index.asp
Or www.fraud.org
For persistant spammers?

This is not -- and please take this as a warning -- the place to discuss what we do or do not do about people who spam the ODP submittal process (or, indeed, any other electronic "organ".)

In my view, ODP is by far the most important directory. The real question though is: “to whom?” The ODP is built for the user community (surfers) and provides an invaluable service to those who know about it.

In the grand scheme of things though, I believe we are seeing fewer and fewer searchers (as a percent of the searching population) who utilize the ODP. (I have no factual information to back that statement, only limited personal observation.)

The search marketplace is of course dominated by Google, Yahoo, and MSN. Within my circle of friends, I would be hard pressed to find even one who knows of something called ODP. And, none of my friends would even dream of using a directory. In fact, they see the entire directory approach as archaic. Although my friends would all be middle aged, it seems even less likely that many young people have ever heard of the ODP.

So my question is will there be any effort from DMOZ to improve on the front end search engine offered? It seems that this would be a substantial component to the community service goal. That is, providing the tools that best fit the search community.

longcall911 said:

In my view, ODP is by far the most important directory. The real question though is: “to whom?” The ODP is built for the user community (surfers) and provides an invaluable service to those who know about it.

In the grand scheme of things though, I believe we are seeing fewer and fewer searchers (as a percent of the searching population) who utilize the ODP. (I have no factual information to back that statement, only limited personal observation.)

The search marketplace is of course dominated by Google, Yahoo, and MSN. Within my circle of friends, I would be hard pressed to find even one who knows of something called ODP. And, none of my friends would even dream of using a directory. In fact, they see the entire directory approach as archaic. Although my friends would all be middle aged, it seems even less likely that many young people have ever heard of the ODP.

So my question is will there be any effort from DMOZ to improve on the front end search engine offered? It seems that this would be a substantial component to the community service goal. That is, providing the tools that best fit the search community.

Click to expand...

I can back that statement the only way I have seen DMOZ results is if I stumble on them through another search engine. Or If I'm looking If dmoz has listed my site yet.
Here are a Few reasons why

1. The Search results are quite BAD.
2. Because of DMOZ guidlines the descriptions don't tell you what you will find at the website.
3. Half of all searches produce no results at all--even on very popular subjects just because an editor has not gotten around to it yet. The directory is way out of date. Current events, movies, tv, entertainment are lacking.
4. Good Editors hands are tied if they see quality sites outside their category. If Everyone was made a GLOBAL Editor they could pick up the slack on those HUGE categories.
5. Bad editors can't be routed out quickly cause there often in obscure categories never looked at. If every one was made a GLOBAL Editor Bad editors would show up right away and can be removed and what they did fixed.
6. Why do I keep trying to get my page listed here? Page Rank and Back door entry into many sites.

Could DMOZ be a good directory again?? Yes I have believed in it since day one.
What are all the complaints by the users?? Contructive criticism.
So Why doesn't DMOZ make it better?? Who knows-supply and demand people are still demanding the services - as is. And as long as we continue using it they wont see need for change.

From your 6 points I can only come to one conclusion: you totaly do not understand what a directory is and DMOZ in particular

The ODP doesn't have the development staff, or the server strength, or even a reason to provide much more front-end user support.

Part of what you're looking for is called "Google directory search". Nobody does search better, under more adverse circumstances, than Google, and I commend them to you for your searching needs.


Another part is called "free-for-all link farm" and there are many of them on the web -- so many that the ODP generally doesn't list them. Feel free to use them also. We won't be offended; the ODP doesn't compete with them.

Another part of what you mention is best fulfilled by sites like Froogle, ABEBooks, eBay, etc., which offer much finer-grained specialty searches. The ODP can't compete with them on their terms, and doesn't try.

ODP editors are aware (probably surprisingly aware, from your point of view) of the intrinsic and implementation limitations of the website directory and of volunteer projects in general. After all, we've been pushing those limits for several years now. The procedures in place now have been developed over five years of rather intensive testing; they'll continue to be tweaked, but a wholesale redesign is left as an exercise for the next directory founder.

Anyone who can persuade a few thousand people to agree your way is better -- go for it! But not on ODP premises, please.