Status of www.oregonlawyer.com

I am checking the status of http://www.oregonlawyer.com. I submitted under:

http://dmoz.org/Society/Law/Services/Lawyers_and_Law_Firms/Directories/North_America/United_States/

Our busines is exclusive to Oregon. Currently, Oregon is not listed under United States. In my submission I requested the addition of Oregon in relation to my site submission.

Take care...

Steve Sawyer

When was it submitted?

Aside: Note that you'll probably need a lot more content (compare to the Oregon sections of the best two or three national directories, and make sure it's obvious that you're better) to be seriously considered for a listing.

Thanks for the prompt reply Hutcheson.

oregonlawyer.com was submitted on 10/04/04.

My points in response to your recommendation:

Your point is well made and well taken.

Our main objective with this site is simply to bring people with legal needs together with lawyers, via the Web. In pursuit of this, one of our goals was to eliminate much of the confusion that the larger national sites pose for "Aunt Judy and Uncle Fred", in their search for an attorney. My Dad, a judge of 35+ years and one of the officers of the company, struggles to find attorneys he knows with the larger, national sites. Other lawyers, locally, had shared these same thoughts.

We also allow the attorneys to modify their own profiles online without any dependency on our staff. Since this portion of our site is password protected and you may need to review it, I will be happy to provide you with a temporary Oregon State Bar Number.

Given the focus and goals of our site, we feel our site is as good as any and better than most, and getting better all the time. Our intention is not to duplicate another voluminous legal directory. If this jeopardizes our chances with DMOZ, such is life.

After 2+ months we currently have approximately 30 firms subscribed and counting…

Sorry about the long reply Hutcheson. This is probably much more than you wanted to know...

Thank you for your time and suggestion,

Steve

The temporary access offer is a good idea. I'd suggest resubmitting the site to the same category, with notes about the offer of a temporary number in brackets at the end of the suggested description -- so the reviewing editor will see it. (This is commonly done in the Adult area, I understand, where onerous registration is required.)

Having never searched for an Oregon lawyer, I haven't seen the void you mention -- but spotting such a void is certainly the first step towards creating a unique online service. We'd typically do some spot comparisons to guage uniqueness. For instance, pick any Oregon city large enough to have a separate ODP category for legal services....and compare.

Thank you for your time and suggestions. I almost feel like I can call you Hutch.

Seriously, I will do as you suggest. I assume that this will add the initial 30 day wait time, associated with initial submissions, to the process???

On that note, do I resume this thread after the resubmission or begin anew?

Thanks again,

Steve

I'm afraid it would add to the 30-day wait time for asking for status, although it may reduce the time for listing, and you should continue to use this thread.

hutcheson hardly ever gives advice on submissions, so he must think your site may be listable with small modifications....

Thank you Hutcheson and Arubin.

Your effort and advise is very much appreciated.

X (crossed fingers)

Take care,

Steve

Please don't read too much into my comments. IMO, the site needs a great deal more content.

Alas, finding an empty void is only the FIRST step. Filling it is the next step, ODP submittal third at best. I was merely trying to be non-judgmental. It also occurred to me later that I should have also said: the void you perceived may have been a failure of your own search technique, not a genuine gap.

I should mention, as I usually do, that populating a directory with valuable, unique content is a work that daunts the vast majority of webmasters. In addition, it is not realistic to expect to compete with an organization (like the Oregon Bar Association itself) which already HAS the content, and only lacks the initiative to put it online.

And finally, I should add a plug for my own way of filling voids -- rather than start overlapping or competing sites, I cooperate in projects whose goals are compatible with mine. (Some lawyers, for instance, work on building the ODP into a more effective legal directory. Perhaps you could even consider providing the impetus to the OBA to get their act together in this respect.)

Hi Hutcheson,

Didn't notice your follow-up comments until now.

Your points are, once again, well made and well taken.

When we began this project our goal was not to "create a site and they will come", while duplicating features that were already available elsewhere. Due to my other projects, I actually resisted early on. It was only after talking with many attorneys did various needs become clear, which led to the belief that we could fill a genuine void.

One of the deciding factors, for me, was when multiple lawyers informed me that there had once been a regional lawyer directory that was much more to their liking and provided them with a higher quality of client inquiries. Apparently it was absorbed by one of the national entities and eventually disappeared.

A few of the features that appeal to our clients (lawyers) are:

1. Their listing is not "buried" in a national pool. It is Oregon specific.
2. Their listing is not surrounded with multiple offers and opportunities which add to the visual confusion for prospective clients, as well as the pockets of the listing firm.
2. Their profile is much more complete, including a bio and photo. Most firms simply provide line item information and a link to the attorney's Web site.
3. They enjoy leads based on a batting rotation format as opposed to the more common "first in time, first in line" priority listing format. We don’t offer higher placement for higher cost and never will.
4. They are able to modify their profile, online and real-time, whenever they wish.

The last item partially addresses your well made point, with regards to the daunting aspect of content. The lawyers are empowered to provide the quantity and quality of content they deem appropriate for their profile.

The meat & potatoes of what we offer our clients, as well as the searching public, is a comprehensive, easy to use, search process which primarily facilitates prospective clients finding a lawyer of their choice. I would use an online auction as an example. We have buyers (prospective clients) and we have sellers (lawyers). The main feature that either party truly values, in their experience with our site, is accessing plenty of the other group. The additional site content is nice and convenient but not the main reason folks come to our site. In summary, the content that both parties grade their experience with our site on is plenty of "buyers" and plenty of "sellers” to choose from.

Given these and many other points, we are much more focused on addressing and providing the features which our visitors and clients are telling us they value most, than competing with any other entity or creating a "textbook" site. As long as they find our site to be of value, we'll keep doing what we're doing. With all due respect, your suggestions are very much appreciated and have provided us with numerous discussions on this end. However, if our direction comes to a fork between our clients and the DMOZ, we will always choose our clients and part as friends with DMOZ. On the other hand, DMOZ currently has no listings under Law Firm Directories, in Oregon and our firms have an opportunity to work together to fill that void.

A closing comment: I have mentioned many ideas to the Oregon State Bar, including simply informing them of dead and outdated links on their site, with very little response and absolutely zero results, over a period of several months.

Once again Hutcheson, this is probably much more than you wanted to know but your reply was “stimulating” and very much appreciated.

Thanks and take care...

Steve