Site Status of http://www.redgoldfish.co.uk

1 - Is the job site http://www.redgoldfish.co.uk still in the pool?

2 - If a few hundred sites are long awaiting a review in that category, you would think that the editor looking after this section would at some point want to be trying to clear at least some of the back log? If so why is it that no one has looked in on the category since 23rd August?

3 - If the Category is being neglected because the editors concerned are to busy to give time to DMOZ which looks like the case here, isnt it time for DMOZ to look towards appointing another editor to the section who can deal with the volume?, and who can give time to building the directory?.

If the one editor that looks after the US job site category, can do a great job (now listing over 323 sites for the US) why cant two editors working on the UK region job site category advance further than the 88 sites that have been listed now for over a year without any additions?.

Dont the editors of this forum think that this at least needs looking into?

>why cant two editors working on the UK region job site category advance further than the 88 sites that have been listed now for over a year without any additions?

Maybe they already found jobs on the 88 sites, and don't have time to edit any more?

Maybe they gave up on jobhunting and now spend their time building up Crafts/Basketweaving, Underwater.

Maybe one died and the other got married.

Maybe one was removed for abuse, and the other timed out for inactivity.

We really don't know. And it doesn't matter. If we HAD two very active editors there, we'd still be happy to have a new qualified editor. If (as seems likely) we don't, we'd merely be happy to have a new qualified editor. It boils down to: what those two are (or are not) doing, doesn't and shouldn't affect what I do.

Perhaps this thread may inspire a local editor to work in the neglected category. If so, job seekers will thank you, (but UK widget seekers or some such will rue the day you distracted their editor.) Perhaps the thread will inspire another Limey to take on their local category -- freeing up the toplevel UK editors to go back to the widget sellers' categories -- and all editors will thank you.

You've given us the information (that there may be a neglected category). Now what the editors do with it, is up to them.

Thanks for your reply

During a recent discussion with one of the editors for this category i was informed that over 700 Sites were in this pool awaiting review (how true this is, i can only take their word for it) and because "they had better things to be doing" they were unlikely to take action!.

So i think im fairly safe to conclude that for Job web sites like the one i work on, we would be unlikely to see a DMOZ listing!

Meanwhile, on the basis that the category is to big for a new editor and the only hope of any action being taken is, as you say in your words "Perhaps the thread will inspire another Limey to take on their local category" then i guess i probably have more chance of muffing the queen than seeing redgoldfish.co.uk listed as a Job site in DMOZ.

Finally, to conclude should redgoldfish ever get listed i would be happy to show my ars@ in woolworths window. (thats a department store that us limey's use about the size of JC Pennys with big glass windows, just in case you didnt know!)

Kind Regards

Richard

Is the information i have been given correct that over 700 sites are awaiting review in this category??

If so dont you think that something should be done by now??

And if you dont think so "because of the shape of the moon or because of the fact that you eat cheese last night" etc, etc they wouldnt you at least agree that something is very wrong in a system that in effect fails quality websites who would require a listing in DMOZ to get into the google directory and others that feed off the DMOZ data?.

they wouldnt you at least agree that something is very wrong in a system that in effect fails quality websites who would require a listing in DMOZ to get into the google directory and others that feed off the DMOZ data?.

Click to expand...

Whilst I feel your pain I predict there will soon be a post that there is something wrong with a business plan that relies on a dmoz listing at all. You have submitted your site, thats really all you can do.

Sorry, but that's a straw man.

There ARE no websites, quality or otherwise, that require a listing in DMOZ to get into the Google directory. There are many other ways, thousands of people who will help you do that.

And ... it really doesn't matter how much a website NEEDS the ODP. The shoe is altogether on the other foot -- it's how much the ODP needs that website (that is, how many of our surfers can't find what they want at a site already listed). That, we can only evaluate by the following rough approximation: "How many volunteers feel that the most important of the many things they could be doing is alleviating ODP shortcomings in that topic?"

The issue of quality sites is even problematic. We don't know ahead of time which sites are quality. We have a good feel for what PERCENTAGE of submitted sites on a topic are likely to be quality. The higher that percentage, the more editors like to review submittals -- the lower, well, you get the picture.

And very very few webmasters have the same definition of "quality" that an informed surfer does. So, as far as our experience goes, "quality website" appears to have no meaning other than be "one in which the speaker has a financial interest." Which is not a consideration for an editor -- or really needs not to be if the editor is being fair.

Unfortunately, you've chosen to develop a site in a highly competitive area (lots of other sites) with a very high percentage of low-value sites submitted. (Try to imagine a situation in which the available unique information was spread over 700 separate sites! Now try to imagine how a surfer would find what he needed in such a mess! Fortunate indeed that so few of those sites will be listable.) But until an editor grits his teeth and dives in, every submittal looks alike.

Is something even wrong with this picture? By our approximation, not necessarily and not apparently -- nobody has been compelled to look for new sites (inside or outside the submittal queue). Of course, we haven't checked with any surfers besides our editors -- and we don't have any way of checking. (Maybe it's a good thing there are other ways of indexing the web!)

I don't know if you remember what nea said to you back on 18th October so here's a reminder.

Your site suggestion is waiting for review in the category you indicate. There is no way to predict when that will happen, but if you haven't seen your site listed in 6 months' time you are welcome back for another status check. Thank you!

Click to expand...

We don't discuss the merits or otherwise of an individual website here and neither do we want to discuss whether or not your objectives coincide with ours. These topics are covered adequately in the forum guidelines and FAQ.

If your website hasn't been listed by 18th April, by all means request another status update after that date in this same thread. In the meantime, please allow us to get on with what we want to do, which is edit.

Dr Ow - Your Quote:-

"I predict there will soon be a post that there is something wrong with a business plan that relies on a dmoz listing"

Click to expand...

Hutcheson - Your Quote:-

"Sorry, but that's a straw man. There ARE no websites, quality or otherwise, that require a listing in DMOZ to get into the Google directory."

Click to expand...

Gentlemen, the fact still remains that by being listed in DMOZ you are in effect providing a vote of confidence for the website listed. Furthermore, the other directories that feed off the DMOZ listing are also in effect following your vote in the same way also, surfers of the directory need to be confident that DMOZ provides results that will benefit them.

Its not about building a business that relies on a dmoz listing. DMOZ SHOULD BE LISTING Quality sites rich in the subject matter that users of the directory are looking for.

Currently, the category that this site has been trying to list in for over a year is "UK Job Search". As at today the site has 63,000 active UK Jobs listed in full detail to search from, the site has over 200,000 pages of Job details, profiles and job information. That is the largest number of Jobs featured on a "UK Job Search" site next to www.reed.co.uk , that is also to say, more than any other site you currently list in this Category - i would say that makes www.redgoldfish.co.uk a UK Job site that should be listed in this category, this is the point im making here.

Hutcheson 2nd Quote:-

"Unfortunately, you've chosen to develop a site in a highly competitive area (lots of other sites) with a very high percentage of low-value sites submitted. (Try to imagine a situation in which the available unique information was spread over 700 separate sites! Now try to imagine how a surfer would find what he needed in such a mess! Fortunate indeed that so few of those sites will be listable.) But until an editor grits his teeth and dives in, every submittal looks alike."

Click to expand...

Yes i can well understand that, but despite the high volume of sites (some being very poor) the team at redgoldfish have spent almost five years now perfecting this job site, meanwhile i would agree that many others may try and get a site listed that they have put together in a flash, but we are trying to improve the quality on the internet, just by looking at the site ANY editor would be able to see very quickly that its rich in content, of quality and of very high relevance to the category "UK Job Site". Meanwhile, some other poor quality sites are listed in the category at the cost of this one. That is not delivering the the result that the directory surfer would be looking for.

Jim Noble - Quote

"If your website hasn't been listed by 18th April, by all means request another status update after that date in this same thread"

Click to expand...

Why not, whats another six months anyway. Will stick it in the diary, but i wont hold my breath that the position will have changed any. Based on the inactivity of the current two editors that DMOZ appointed for this sector, that have long given up on the directory, i cant see how the position can change unless a miricle happens and another editor gets involved.

In closing, thanks gentlemen anyway for at least replying to some of my earlier points, the position hasnt changed any and i currently have no confidence in DMOZ that the position will change any in the future.

Kind Regards

Richard Clarke
www.redgoldfish.co.uk

Richard, its common knowledge that DMOZ sucks, editors are lazy and those that arn't are on ego trips the majority of the time.

I agree with all that you say and if editors in this thread say that a DMOZ listing doesn't effect the popularity of your website - then they need to own a proper website, one that provides a service or sells products, none of this blog crap.

As you say, the DMOZ directory (which sucks) is used by Google and 100's of other websites, while this might not boost the Google PageRank of a website (Google only counting directory listings as one), it certainly helps getting noticed.

I also think its rediculous that we have to wait 6 months at a time, and editors say it as if 6 months is a short period! I can understand that there are alot of submissions to DMOZ and editors have better things to do than check submissions status' but like i've said before - why isn't this automated?! (a simple 'check your site is still in the pool' button would suffice!).

The simple answer is accept more editor submissions.

But that won't happen, so in conclusion, DMOZ sucks the big one. It's only a matter of time before DMOZ is dropped by Google and they release their own directory (which you know will be good!) - then all of the directory clones will tap into Google instead.

Please note, this post is nothing personal towards editors, just the DMOZ system in general (which sucks).

editors are lazy and those that arn't are on ego trips the majority of the time.

Click to expand...

Please note, this post is nothing personal towards editors,

Click to expand...

Which of the above statements is true - you can't have it both ways.

[I have many many web sites, the majority of which are not in ODP, and never will be. I've learnt to live with it and get on with life. You can either do that, or spent your life going around the SEO forurms making posts ranting about the inequity of ODP]

As pointed out recently in an SEO forum, I don't like chocoate chip cookies, so chocolate chip cookies suck.

It's nothing personal as in your probably decent people when your not sitting at the computer logged on to DMOZ admin, but as soon as the password is authenticated, DMOZ editors become.. do do do dooo....

Why arn't your websites in DMOZ?

As pointed out recently in an SEO forum, I don't like chocoate chip cookies, so chocolate chip cookies suck.

Click to expand...

I don't think this is relevant to my post, the general view is DMOZ sucks, its not just MY opinion, but lets not get into the debate as to who likes DMOZ and who doesn't. You must remember that I mean the DMOZ system, not the idea.

In my last post 28 i stated exactly why i thought that the Job site company i work with www.redgoldfish.co.uk should have its website listed in DMOZ.

If other members wish to comment on this issue thats fair enough i cant stop them. Many webmasters that may be frustrated with DMOZ are reading this forum and currently circa 400 have read this thread.

Currently, it is poor when a "UK Job Site" that is almost the biggest on the internet covering the UK still cant get listed under its category in DMOZ. The directory is not providing the best results for its users.

The two editors of the section have confirmed that a) they are not interested anymore in editing b) have better things to do because of other business interests and c) Have no intention of reviewing the section because it has over 700 websites in it awaiting review.

So if DMOZ are recruiting editors that couldnt care less whats the point?, the directory at the current rate may well end up in trouble.

Meanwhile, If none of the editors here take any notice of this post well you may as well get the message reply system automated frankly. Perhaps you could automate the reply to one of the following and cut the middle man out:-

1. Your website is awaiting review
2. Your website is not in the review pool please submit again
3. Come back in 6 months

If the editors here are serious about this directory providing a usefull tool to internet users they should seriously look at this problem.

The section i have been trying to get listed in is UK "Job Search". I.e Many internet surfers that are looking up Job sites in the UK using DMOZ should see results that are relevant to searching for jobs in the UK. As one of the biggest UK Job sites you would think that the site would be in this list!

Currently DMOZ is failing webmasters in acting, but more over is failing the users of the directory.

If you are looking for website promotion, yes, it is absolutely true that DMOZ won't do a quick job and will never do a good job for you. Worse, the vast majority of our edits will HURT your site's competitive position (as we list your competitors.) And editors really don't mind editing, even though every single edit will hurt far more webmasters than it helps.

The questions then are:

(1) Given that's the reality, what does a webmaster do? Curse the darkness, or look elsewhere for light?

(2) And if an editor thinks that the ODP concept isn't the only important thing on the web (let alone in life), what to do with other spare time?

(3) And for surfers: if the ODP doesn't do what you need, is it so much closer than anything else that your best course of action is to make the ODP what you need by contributing your own effort?

Obsessing on the ODP isn't the right answer to any question. It's one tool in one kind of toolbox, that's all. If you need a different toolbox, or just a different tool, there'll be no hard feelings among ODP editors if you just go find it for yourself -- still less if you make one for everyone.

Im not sure if your relpy was directed to me or the other poster.

I made my point in post 28 and have confirmed the same in last post. Just one quick point:-

Worse, the vast majority of our edits will HURT your site's competitive position (as we list your competitors.) And editors really don't mind editing, even though every single edit will hurt far more webmasters than it helps.

Click to expand...

NUMBER 1 Priority for editors should be building a QUALITY directory with RELEVANT sites listed which are rich in CONTENT of the subject category that the directory user is looking up. HURT doesnt come into it!

Somewhere along the line here Editors are starting to miss the point about what DMOZ should be for. When a substantial UK Job website cant get listed in the directory under its category something is seriously wrong with the DMOZ forumla for listing.

Obsessing on the ODP isn't the right answer to any question

Click to expand...

Absolutely true, but then not talking about it in this forum wont make it go away either. This forum was designed to discuss listing applications.

Currently anytime i spend here is my own private time which i have lots of. I cant edit the section myself because "Its to big for new editors" and meanwhile no other editor is working on the section either, so NOTHING is changing.

By posting here at least others that read this thread will understand exactly how DMOZ fails both webmasters and directory users.

It's OK for you to think the site is a good one. But an editor can't make that determination without reviewing it -- that is, anything you say about it won't be taken into account when it's reviewed. In fact, it almost certainly won't be taken into account when deciding which site to review first. And that is as it ought to be -- it's not fair to neglect webmasters' sites just because they don't frequent the right forums.

So I think you're looking for a kind of response that wouldn't be right for us to give.

Which the crux of the problem; if I have in front of me 500 unreviewed sites, I have no way of knowing which is the best one, until I review it, so the best one may wait till the end.

From a list of unreviewed I may choose ones with well written title and descriptions ahead of those with bad ones, assuming [probably incorrectly] that a well written description might mean a better quality site.

I may choose to delay review sites that have been submitted multiple times to multiple categories on the basis that the sites may be spammy, but at the least, that the site may be more time consuming to review.

But other that that, I have no way of knowing what the better sites are - so sites get reviewed generally in what ever order an editor finds convenient. On the other hand, at least from my point of view, that's one of the perks of being an editor, is not knowing each day, which site is going to be a surprise gem in the general slush pile that contains many boring badly designed sites.

And there have to be some perks to being an editor, otherwise I think we would walk away from the job, considering the continuing barrage of insults and degrading comments posted in SEO forums.

[And for the other person who hijacked this thread - chocolate chips cookies are relevant - those who fail to get their site listed and then declare that DMOZ should be shut down because editors are corrupt, is like someone not liking chocolate chip cookies who wants them removed from the market because they are bad.]

And here we have the problem in a nut shell:-

It's OK for you to think the site is a good one. But an editor can't make that determination without reviewing it -- that is, anything you say about it won't be taken into account when it's reviewed. In fact, it almost certainly won't be taken into account when deciding which site to review first. And that is as it ought to be -- it's not fair to neglect webmasters' sites just because they don't frequent the right forums

Click to expand...

and:-

Which the crux of the problem; if I have in front of me 500 unreviewed sites, I have no way of knowing which is the best one, until I review it, so the best one may wait till the end.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, but one click on this link www.redgoldfish.co.uk and you will quickly see that its an established blue chip job website of quality, with over 67,000 UK active current jobs showing. The site should be listed in the directory. Its of high interest to your customers looking for UK Job sites in the directory. Problem here is that the website doesnt even get that review!.

Meanwhile, the directory includes in this sector sites that dont offer the directory user what they require. But worse than all of that is the fact that in effect the category doesnt have an editor anymore because the two appointed are no longer interested or active.

So as each month goes by, more and more sites get added to the review list (currently over 700 of them) and no one wants to know - here is the problem.

With no editor active on the section and no new ones that can be appointed because its too big a category for a new editor, we are at the end of the road - this is where DMOZ is failing both the webmaster and the directory user!.

For what it's worth - I'm not in the UK, but I looked for programming jobs with an uncommon keyword. I found an impressive number it seemed, but on further inpspection it seemed it was the same few jobs posted over and over every few days. From an end user view - very spammy. So I gave it the five minute review and on that basis, would not rush to list it as being an outstanding resource. From that [statistically unsound] sample, I would say the number of jobs are much less that it seems, and if I was the editor would spend much more time reviewing it and deciding what to do.

With no editor active on the section and no new ones that can be appointed because its too big a category for a new editor, we are at the end of the road

Click to expand...

If you read this part of the forum's FAQ, you'll find you are mistaken. Further, the parent category has two named volunteer editors who will get around to reviewing your suggestion when their other priorities allow.

Just for the record, you most recently suggested your site to the UK Job Search category on 25th September (If there were earlier ones, that one overwrote them.) and the pool awaiting review there is an order smaller than the 500 you mention.

The current status of the site has already been made clear and there is no further point continuing this thread. Closing.