Eli Aloisi
Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2004
- Messages
- 64
Putting the last updated date and time on the bottom of every catagory was a good idea. I'm sure it helps get some of those catagories that go neglected for a long time some added attention.
Last update date and time
- Thread starter Eli Aloisi
- Start date
spectregunner
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2003
- Messages
- 8,768
But, like many other kinds of information, just looking at the date and time does not tell you the last time an editor visited the category. There are a number of actions that an editor can take within the unreviewed pool of sites that does not result in a change to the date/time stamp.
jgwright
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2004
- Messages
- 256
Actually I didn't realise until I just checked that this was on the public side. At first I misread the post as a suggestion rather than a statement. I like the idea from a point of view of plain old good standards. I get upset when other repositories of information don't post this. And I find it amazing that so many news articles don't include it. 
But to me it's not that useful here. I don't pay any attention to it on the editor side either - although one day it might just jump out at me and flag something I should be paying attention to I suppose.
But to me it's not that useful here. I don't pay any attention to it on the editor side either - although one day it might just jump out at me and flag something I should be paying attention to I suppose.Eli Aloisi
Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2004
- Messages
- 64
yeah but its nice to know when the last time they skipped over reviewing your site was.
Well, you can build whatever paranoid fantasies you want.
But in the real universe, there are many reasons an editor would work in a category, and never consider looking at any of the unreviewed sites; there are still other times why an editor would have time to review only some of the suggested sites; and, of course, on the other hand, there are times when an editor might work for hours on the submittals in a category without actually listing any of them or changing the category in any way -- indeed, when "skipping" a site means "not considering it for an immediate obvious rejection" -- possibly even a good thing? And finally, it is always possible that an editor moved your site to a more appropriate category (without making any changes to the category itself), and you are merely staring at the blank spot on the wall where the TV used to be.
In other words, this is still more data about the 4-million-site DIRECTORY, that simply doesn't say anything about the status of any particular single SITE submittal.
But in the real universe, there are many reasons an editor would work in a category, and never consider looking at any of the unreviewed sites; there are still other times why an editor would have time to review only some of the suggested sites; and, of course, on the other hand, there are times when an editor might work for hours on the submittals in a category without actually listing any of them or changing the category in any way -- indeed, when "skipping" a site means "not considering it for an immediate obvious rejection" -- possibly even a good thing? And finally, it is always possible that an editor moved your site to a more appropriate category (without making any changes to the category itself), and you are merely staring at the blank spot on the wall where the TV used to be.
In other words, this is still more data about the 4-million-site DIRECTORY, that simply doesn't say anything about the status of any particular single SITE submittal.
jgwright
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2004
- Messages
- 256
As spectregunner said: "There are a number of actions that an editor can take within the unreviewed pool of sites that does not result in a change to the date/time stamp.". You will get some kind of information about when an editor last opted to add a site he'd found himself or perform general QC work or list one of the other unreviewed sites but, as hutcheson pointed out, this wouldn't be that reliable as the site you're interested in might have been moved to unreviewed in a different category.Eli Aloisi said:
Folks obsess so much about the workings of the ODP. Along with people dissecting their logs for traces of referrals from dmoz. It's second only to those who go into fits of rhapsody as they watch googlebot crawl their sites in real time. Please, there's no mystery.
I'm sure if folks just got ahead with improving their sites then dmoz listings and google rankings would take care of themselves. The date stamp is a useful feature, both in the ODP and on other sites (although "automatic" date stamps are often irritating)
An interesting exercise is to find a recently updated category and then open the equivalent google directory page (green button bottom right of page) and compare the changes. Looking at any newly added sites and what they have to offer can be a good source for ideas.
I can quite see that nothing can be learnt about submission status in a particular category (the editor may have come across a site while surfing, or may have chosen to review in date order etc.) Recent dates with new additions are an encouraging sign of activity in a category, whilst older dates don't seem to signify much at all.
It is a pity that Google don't date stamp their directory pages with their last update time, I sometimes think it reflects badly on the ODP that out of date directory pages with broken links are presented - especially as it seems their updates of the ODP data are sporadic.
As for stats - always useful, but not to be obsessed over (I do confess to worrying if Googlebot doesn't visit for a week or two!) Stats can be very useful for monitoring search terms and visitor behaviour, often highlighting navigation or content problems. From reading at this forum there is little to be learnt from dmoz visits (or lack thereof) although I did learn what tulipchain was from spotting it in my stats.
An interesting exercise is to find a recently updated category and then open the equivalent google directory page (green button bottom right of page) and compare the changes. Looking at any newly added sites and what they have to offer can be a good source for ideas.
I can quite see that nothing can be learnt about submission status in a particular category (the editor may have come across a site while surfing, or may have chosen to review in date order etc.) Recent dates with new additions are an encouraging sign of activity in a category, whilst older dates don't seem to signify much at all.
It is a pity that Google don't date stamp their directory pages with their last update time, I sometimes think it reflects badly on the ODP that out of date directory pages with broken links are presented - especially as it seems their updates of the ODP data are sporadic.
As for stats - always useful, but not to be obsessed over (I do confess to worrying if Googlebot doesn't visit for a week or two!) Stats can be very useful for monitoring search terms and visitor behaviour, often highlighting navigation or content problems. From reading at this forum there is little to be learnt from dmoz visits (or lack thereof) although I did learn what tulipchain was from spotting it in my stats.