Is ODP turning into Wayback Machine ?

It has been mentioned in this thread that webmasters are whining and complaining so it sounds to me like it is you against them.

Click to expand...

They're complaining largely because they are under the misapprehension that we are a listing service, and set their expectations accordingly. It's not that we're against them, it's just that we don't provide the service for them that they would like us to.

To me it looks actually like that you are giving non-commercial sites priority

Click to expand...

It may be that some individual editors prefer to work in categories which are dominated by non-commercial sites, but in terms of our eligibility criteria there is no preference or disfavour for non-commercial sites.

I wonder where you draw the line

Click to expand...

If the site provides unique content, i.e. content / services that can't be found elsewhere then it's probably a site that we'd like to list. If the site provides minimal unique content and exists primarily to generate income by enticing the user to click on adverts, then it's not the sort of site we'd like to list -- instead we'd help users by listing the advertised sites instead, cutting out the unnecessary middle-man. If the site is just a front-end for another distribution service (drop-shipping) then we'd just list the main website for the distribution service. If the site is for a local shop, it can contain unique information about that shop, even if all the products sold are available elsewhere. Full details can be found at http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html -- this is the document that editors work from too, so should contain everything you need to know.

why do you delete the URL's from the posts when they are being uses to support someones case?

Click to expand...

Because we've found from past experience that discussing individual websites isn't productive -- it too often degraded into an argument between the owner and the editors, when the owner won't accept that their site isn't listable, or that "no-one's got around to reviewing it yet" is indeed the reason why it hasn't been added. I'm afraid the large vocal group of people who refused to take what editors told them at face value have ruined it for the people who would benefit from being able to discuss individual sites here.

Hence no discussion of individual sites, and therefore no need to provide links to your sites. The links are removed to prevent link-dropping an remove any temptation for others to engage in discussing the individual sites.

brmehlman you are welcome but you are missing the point here.

Click to expand...

I didn't choose that example, you did. And the point it illustrates, which I don't think I missed at all, is that we attempt to list useful sites whether or not they are commercial.

I actually think that some of the negative opinions people have about the directory are completely understandable. Recently has there been a concerted effort to better communicate about the directory (via the blog), and I hope that continues to gain momentum.

I understand your frustration, because I believe some of your questions/statements could simply be answered by a better understanding of the directory taxonomy. But here's the thing... most people relatively unfamiliar with ODP probably don't immediately get the distinction of categories. Not every visitor can be expected to read the top level category charter or FAQ before drilling down into the subcategories. On the other hand, since editors deal with the directory structure regularly, categories make more sense to them. I actually think that the two sides tend to neglect each other's viewpoint, thus creating a little bit of friction.

For example:

Let's say that I like Circle dancing, I want to buy a book about it or sign up for a lessons or where to get the proper dancing clothes and shoes, is there a site in your new category that offers it?

Click to expand...

You probably wouldn't find a commercial site in his category, because it is not in a Shopping hierarchy. That makes perfect sense to an editor or seasoned dmoz.org visitor, but isn't necessarily clear-cut to the casual browser.

To me it looks actually like that you are giving non-commercial sites priority, but still saying that there is no preferential treatment for anyone.

Click to expand...

In some categories, non-commercial sites get the ONLY priority because there are more appropriate categories for commercial sites. In turn, there are probably not many non-commercial sites (intentionally) listed in Shopping.

You seem to have an issue with webmasters that are creating sites for financial gaines, so there is a less reason to list those.

Click to expand...

Not to beat a dead horse, but there is a pretty large inventory of sites in the Shopping section.

Also, it is quite possible that editors in any non-Shopping category immediately move or (unfortunately) delete sites that are commercial, even if there is sufficient and relevant non-commercial content. In some cases, the category description and submission instructions explicitly direct commercial sites to submit to a specific Shopping category, but not always.

Over time, an editor (who is human) may become acutely aware of commercial sites that can't be bothered to read submission instructions, many of whom are prone to spamming their submissions. That editor may decide to reject them all with little discretion. That doesn't mean there is a directory-wide prejudice against commercial sites. If anything, there is a prejudice against "webmasters" that can't read submission instructions.

But to be fair, probably thousands of websites are moved, by editors, to more appropriate categories on a regular basis, rather than just being immediately deleted.

At any rate, I hope that more is done over time to help the visitor understand and navigate the 500,000+ categories that are available, and I believe that will happen. The ODP isn't perfect... by any stretch. I think you'd be surprised by the number of editors that agree.

P.S. All of my rejection and listing scenarios are fabricated to make a point. I certainly don't speak for the ODP or its editors. Parts and accessories sold separately (somewhere in the Shopping category).

That's very insightful, pdub, I believe you're correct. After working as an editor, you do have a tendency to forget how much you've learned (and take for granted as common knowledge) and perhaps forget that the public never had the same information in their background.

It's something that I always keep in mind when mentoring a new editor (to never assume anything, especially how much an editor actually knows) and to go into detail about the simplest things, but, I've never applied that to the posters in here for some reason.

Over time, an editor (who is human) may become acutely aware of commercial sites that can't be bothered to read submission instructions, many of whom are prone to spamming their submissions. That editor may decide to reject them all with little discretion. That doesn't mean there is a directory-wide prejudice against commercial sites. If anything, there is a prejudice against "webmasters" that can't read submission instructions.

Click to expand...

In the Regional section of the Directory, sites are placed by their actual brick and mortar address/location. Many times a site owner who is located in Podunk,USA wants their site listed in the nearest large city, or at the State level for "more coverage" (like in a newspaper ad), which is incorrect.

I'd say, at least 50% of the site suggestions we get in Regional have to be moved to where they belong, rather than where the wishful thinking of the suggester has submitted them to, . This creates a lot of work for us, but, it's a common occurance, and sites are not deleted for that, they're just moved to the correct category. (that's one of many other jobs that editors normally do, instead of reviewing site suggestions)

It's more an "irritation or an "inconvenience"" than a "prejudice", no one webmaster is going to be singled out and punished for not knowing better, but, because it's so rare, a webmaster that consistantly submits a proper title/description (by following our guidelines), is bound to get noticed by an editor who works in that area, , and I, personally, keep an eye out for that type of webmaster out of appreciation. That's really the only time, I can think of, that a webmaster might get noticed (other than multiple submissions of the same site).

Most of the Regional sites are either commercial or informational. If they offer online shopping and also have a walkin business, they would most likely quaify to be listed in both Shopping (a topical category) and in their city/locality within Regional. So, really, some commercial sites have a big advantage over non-commercial sites.

There are so many categories in the Directory that it is not surprising that so many people get confused about where to suggest a site. There is a Topical part of the Directory called "Shopping" which is massive, but, within the Regional part of the Directory, each locality/city (depending on how many sites there are) may also have the subcategory "Shopping" under each city.

Good post, .

pdub, crowbar good posts, thank you.

I wonder about the spamming, what do you consider spamming, is it someone submitting to more than one category, submitting once a week or once a month?

Could a lot of the spamming problem be solved by allowing the submitters to understand what happend to their submissions?

People submitting their sites to ODP do that because they understand the value of OPD is it simple as that and if someone submits his/her site to a category and than 3-6 months later it still haven't showed up it might mean that either it was not accepted because the category choosen was wrong, it was deleted, it just isn't acceptable to ODP or for any other reason that there could be for it not to be listed yet.

The same person is very likely to try to submit it again, to a different category, different title and description or change what ever he/she might have 'thought' was the reason.

Now I don't know what tools you do have in the back but I wonder if it would really be that difficult to allow sumbitters to know something about their submission, if it was wrongly placed, has been deleted or just is still sitting in the que waiting for someone to review it.

I understand that all of this might be a lot of work to do but that basically is what it takes to build a great directory, a lot of work.

After I started to look better into this I can see that if I was submitting site to ODP I would run into a problem, probably submit to often and very likely to the wrong category and maybe without never knowing that I was.

If I decided to create a site to sell books about circle dancing I would try to follow the submission guidelines and would search for 'Circle dancing books' and guess what, I would end up in Eric the bun's new category http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=Circle+dancing+books

As I believe I did follow the guidelines I would submit it, it would not get listed so I would submit it again, maybe somewhere else but still close to there and that would make me a spammer I guess

I wonder about the spamming, what do you consider spamming, is it someone submitting to more than one category, submitting once a week or once a month?

Click to expand...

That's another area of miscommunication. A normal person automatically considers "spamming" means the kind of spamming you get in your e-mail everyday, viagra, porn sites, unwanted offers, and opportunities to get filthy rich by helping some diplomat sneak out of his country with millions. (most of which you'll get yourself) .

For editors, spamming the Directory covers much more:
http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/spamming.html

http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#notinclude

Submitting any of these is considered spamming, I believe.

Site status reports is what every site owner would like. Why? Curiosity. They want to know if the suggestion is there waiting. Perfectly normal.

So, I tell you, "Yep, it's there", and.... what will you do with that information, how has that helped you? Multiply that by hundreds of thousands of requests, and you can see that answering just that one question would help neither the editors(who would spend all their editing time doing it), nor the requester (because it changes nothing) .

The next questions would be, "When will it be listed? How can I talk to the editor about it? Why was it rejected? (if it was) How can I make it acceptable? Why is that site listed, but mine isn't? How can I file an abuse report against that editor? Why can't I see what the editor wrote in the editor notes?

The answers to all of these questions creates a debate that will waste countless editing hours and will still not change the status of the site suggestion, because we're not a listing service for site owners (as much as most people might like us to be), .

There are very honest, legitimate webmasters and seo folks out there, but, it's a cut throat industry and there are many not so honest ones out there. The latter will use any means available to use black seo tricks to get an armlock advantage over the honest ones and regular mom & pop sites who know nothing about the web.

Those kind of characters would love to have this kind of information as a tool to gage their success or failure. Not providing them with it protects both you and the Directory, .

People submitting their sites to ODP do that because they understand the value of OPD is it simple as that and if someone submits his/her site to a category and than 3-6 months later it still haven't showed up it might mean that either it was not accepted because the category choosen was wrong, it was deleted, it just isn't acceptable to ODP or for any other reason that there could be for it not to be listed yet.

Click to expand...

We all understand that site suggesters consider a listing in the ODP as essential, but, the value you refer to was created by our current system, I believe. Honestly, the most likely reason a site hasn't been listed is much less ominous, , an editor just hasn't reviewed it yet.

Let me ask you something. If you were an editor, and you had 10,000 site suggestions waiting, which one of those equally important sites would you choose to review? The oldest? the newest? the ones in a certain category? a certain type of site, like a real estate , education, or business sites? maybe all the sites in one city?

Those are the sort of choices an editor has, so it's very random, depending on what our interests are, and whether we're working on a project or not, . Every site is on the same level playing field and has an equal opportunity of being reviewed, but some categories are very unpleasant to work in because the type of sites submitted are sites that need a lot of investigation before we list them.

A government or educational site is pretty trustworthy and straight forward to list, but a real estate or travel site are known for attempting multiple listings using multiple tricks, so they need to be investigated in order to be fair to the honest site suggesters that they are trying to get an advantage over.

If I decided to create a site to sell books about circle dancing I would try to follow the submission guidelines and would search for 'Circle dancing books' and guess what, I would end up in Eric the bun's new category http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/searc...+dancing+books

Click to expand...

This is a common occurance in many niche categories and the local editors forward the sites to the appropriate place. Personally I would understand someone reasoning that as a niche CD category that would be the closest fit and ignoring the fact that it is a shopping site.

A new niche category in one area can give rise to an equivalent new one in another area as an editor trying to fill a category sends sites 'unsuitable' for one area to the right place.

regards