Questions for the editors #2

I'm really not complaining however just a few observations

The directory is plagued with dead, junk & spam sites - Search results are (IMHO) as poor as Yahoo's directory results and far more out of date

Many sections of the directory (including the ones I'm trying to get listed in) have not been updated for Years

Isn't the purpose of the directory to provide relevant - useful - timely results? -- How is this possible without removing 404's/spam and adding new sites?

Dmoz is the Only way for an independent site to acquire free traffic as Yahoo & Google are impossible without page rank (it takes traffic to make traffic - link exchanges ect do not work except for the circles of webmasters controling them) - With no hope of a timely dmoz listing (no traffic) what is the incentive for webmasters to create and maintain quality websites?
(If you make it they will come - is no longer true as "they -the websurfers" can't find the magical feild) - ODP's not listing sites is literaly causing webmasters to give up and kill their sites off (I'm very close)

(Please don't tell me DMOZ is not the answer - I had my sites listed on DMOZ till my server and home computer crashed on the same day) - BTW it took over a year for ODP to remove the bad url's - Yes I did notify - a big mistake

Editors say their primary job is not reviewing sites - could you please explain what the primary function of an editor is then? If it is to maintain the quality/integrity of the directory - how is this possible when worthy & unique websites can be online and not listed for odp's surfers for 2 or 3 years (if ever)

One of the threads above says that editors find sites to list elsewhere (google - links lists ect) - It seems to me that due to the importance of ODP any site worth a da*m must be waiting in that vast vortex which is the "que of unreviewed sites" - If really quite difficult to beleive that their webmasters would not have submitted them to odp where they lie in limbo (a polite way of saying he*l) - Why not simply review each category every month? - It can't be that hard to do


Suggestion:

(greatly) Increase quality standards - Substantial unique content - large informative sites ect - only list the Best sites - If the same info/content is already on ODP don't list it - If surfers won't be happy with what they found - Don't list it - (this would eliminate spam/junk)

have actual review requirements for active editors (ie. that they must accept or reject at least 5 sites from the "que" of the category (or categories) they they are listed on each month) and have enough editors per sub-category to edit all "que'd" sites within 8 weeks - then for each accepted & listed site have - a different - editor mark the site "still ok" at least once every 3 months (ie actually have a look at it) - since most sub-cats have only a few sites this can't possibly be too much to ask


just a few suggestions - comments welcome

thanks,
MEF

If you'd like to improve the ODP by providing us with lists of bad links, we'd love to see some samples. If they are really bad, we'd probably love to see how you came up with them, and what more you could come up with. (Several link-checking schemes are in use, but they can always be improved.)

It is, however, safe to say that your strictures on editors will not be socially acceptable -- not among the targeted micromanagees, and especially not among the putative micromanagers. We simply don't have the power, the ability, or the desire to do what you want.

Therefore -- you are free to begin to implement it on your own project, free in the assurance that we will not compete with you. In fact, if you can express an attractive vision, design the software and social systems that would implement it, and build a micromanagement scheme that editors can appreciate (not just tolerate), many of our editors may even cooperate with you also. (You may already know that many of us participate in other cooperative internet projects.)

This is one case where you'll definitely have to bell your own cat. But having belled it, you would be in a position to begin to gather fellow-workers.