Please let me know the status of http://www.consumerdemocracy.com
submitted multiple times
http://dmoz.org/Home/Consumer_Information/
submitted multiple times
http://dmoz.org/Home/Consumer_Information/
Status www.consumerdemocracy.com
- Thread starter cd2005
- Start date
Request for clarification
Please let us know in what way the site should be more current and why the amount of content is in question. It has a lot of reviews, many more than some sites listed in the ODP, and many new ones are coming in all the time so we are a bit puzzled.
Please note the last we heard the site had not been listed because of a required login and that has been removed at your suggestion.
We appreciate your comments and are wondering if perhaps they reflect an older assessment and have already been addressed.
Thank you.
kctipton said:
Please let us know in what way the site should be more current and why the amount of content is in question. It has a lot of reviews, many more than some sites listed in the ODP, and many new ones are coming in all the time so we are a bit puzzled.
Please note the last we heard the site had not been listed because of a required login and that has been removed at your suggestion.
We appreciate your comments and are wondering if perhaps they reflect an older assessment and have already been addressed.
Thank you.
>It has a lot of reviews, many more than some sites listed in the ODP...
Ah, I perceive you are of the "strive to be the second-worst site listed in the ODP" school of website promotion.
Yes, the bar is always getting higher as more sites move onto the net. We've listed sites there that we probably would not list today, and might even delete if we re-reviewed today. And specifically in this area, we recently realized we'd added way too many low-value listings, and removed hundreds of them. So ESPECIALLY in this area, don't take past listings as a predictor of future criteria.
If you are evidently and obviously better than the best, then a listing is very likely. If not, then if you offer something that the best site can't, again a listing is likely. If again not ... then ... not so likely.
Ah, I perceive you are of the "strive to be the second-worst site listed in the ODP" school of website promotion.
Yes, the bar is always getting higher as more sites move onto the net. We've listed sites there that we probably would not list today, and might even delete if we re-reviewed today. And specifically in this area, we recently realized we'd added way too many low-value listings, and removed hundreds of them. So ESPECIALLY in this area, don't take past listings as a predictor of future criteria.
If you are evidently and obviously better than the best, then a listing is very likely. If not, then if you offer something that the best site can't, again a listing is likely. If again not ... then ... not so likely.
Sparseness and a Possible Conundrum
Thanks for clarifying. This is rational, systematic, and constructive, so of course we are supportive, understanding the role of ODP in bringing quality from a vast universe of diverse information.
Still, there are special facts about sparseness in the consumer review space that might not yet have been brought out in earlier discussions. (We aren't perseverating on the issue of our site here and simply accept in good faith your decision not to include it--no further comment is necessary given your principled response.)
In particular, the number of products of interest to consumers is astronomical and the total number of reviews at any one site, or even on the entire internet, pales by comparison. Further, a multiplicity of reviews of any one product is needed to achieve a helpful sample of user experience. Finally, review sites differ in the types of reviews they provide, and, consequently, offer differing points of perspective. Therefore, from the point of view of a particular user interested in a particular thing, the matrix of adequately reviewed products is sparse: often nothing sufficiently helpful can be found, even when multiple sites are visited. From this perspective it can be argued that consumers might be best served if directed to any number of sites that offer significant numbers of reviews in order to maximize the chance of finding what they want, at least in part. The remedy for sparseness is more information.
The foregoing observation is offered in the spirit of your response since it suggests, given the sparse distribution of reviews, that any significant review site will *always* offer *something* that other sites do not, in other words some amount of coverage that other sites do not have. If a site with a million reviews is listed but one with say 300,000 is not, the latter site will still cover many products the former doesn't, and even the shared coverage will be very different.
So it could be concluded that a conundrum results. Is it better to list only the very top sites as judged from a single, particular editorial perspective, or a multiplicity of sites selected somewhat less judgmentally in order that the diverse interests of net users might better be reflected.
While I have a personal opinion, that a middle course might be best, I leave this to your better judgment, and will even understand if your overworked schedules don't allow a response. From the good rationale you gave I even suspect the middle ground is where you yourselves are heading, so there may be nothing to even to discuss.
The only thing I would insist upon is that while the conundrum of quality versus variety must occur in very many of your categories, it takes on special significance for consumer review sites for the reason given-sparseness. That is not a matter of interpretation but an indisputable particular fact about this one category or a subset of cateories.
It is interesting that all those contributors of reviews, on any site whereever, are perhaps like the ODP editorial community, just trying to deliver helpful information to others. I don't want to clog machinery producing valuable results, so will get out of the way and use no more of your time.
Thanks for listening.
hutcheson said:
Thanks for clarifying. This is rational, systematic, and constructive, so of course we are supportive, understanding the role of ODP in bringing quality from a vast universe of diverse information.
Still, there are special facts about sparseness in the consumer review space that might not yet have been brought out in earlier discussions. (We aren't perseverating on the issue of our site here and simply accept in good faith your decision not to include it--no further comment is necessary given your principled response.)
In particular, the number of products of interest to consumers is astronomical and the total number of reviews at any one site, or even on the entire internet, pales by comparison. Further, a multiplicity of reviews of any one product is needed to achieve a helpful sample of user experience. Finally, review sites differ in the types of reviews they provide, and, consequently, offer differing points of perspective. Therefore, from the point of view of a particular user interested in a particular thing, the matrix of adequately reviewed products is sparse: often nothing sufficiently helpful can be found, even when multiple sites are visited. From this perspective it can be argued that consumers might be best served if directed to any number of sites that offer significant numbers of reviews in order to maximize the chance of finding what they want, at least in part. The remedy for sparseness is more information.
The foregoing observation is offered in the spirit of your response since it suggests, given the sparse distribution of reviews, that any significant review site will *always* offer *something* that other sites do not, in other words some amount of coverage that other sites do not have. If a site with a million reviews is listed but one with say 300,000 is not, the latter site will still cover many products the former doesn't, and even the shared coverage will be very different.
So it could be concluded that a conundrum results. Is it better to list only the very top sites as judged from a single, particular editorial perspective, or a multiplicity of sites selected somewhat less judgmentally in order that the diverse interests of net users might better be reflected.
While I have a personal opinion, that a middle course might be best, I leave this to your better judgment, and will even understand if your overworked schedules don't allow a response. From the good rationale you gave I even suspect the middle ground is where you yourselves are heading, so there may be nothing to even to discuss.
The only thing I would insist upon is that while the conundrum of quality versus variety must occur in very many of your categories, it takes on special significance for consumer review sites for the reason given-sparseness. That is not a matter of interpretation but an indisputable particular fact about this one category or a subset of cateories.
It is interesting that all those contributors of reviews, on any site whereever, are perhaps like the ODP editorial community, just trying to deliver helpful information to others. I don't want to clog machinery producing valuable results, so will get out of the way and use no more of your time.
Thanks for listening.