suggestion on status check

As to the "if the suggestions were good, we would have already thought of them" point - I agree that that is an absolutely terrible way to reply. I'm sorry if this came over that way - it wasn't mean to be just something to put you off. But if you take some time searching these fora you will find ample (and I do mean ample) discussions where the same suggestion has been brought up and has been discussed at great lengths. This is in addition to discussions which have gone on in the internal editor fora.

So you will hopefully see that this isn't just an easy way to dismiss a usggestion without thinking about it, but that it truly has been debated ad nauseum.

great going

when i started the thread i never expected it to be so interactive. responses in this thread hint that something has to be done towards finding a way out.

rkhare said:

responses in this thread hint that something has to be done towards finding a way out.

Click to expand...

Hmm. I thought the response from the editors indicated that we see no need for any form of status information to be send to webmasters. The attempt to do so here at R-Z wasn't a succes. For the near future I can not see that we will implement any other way of answering status request.
So where do you want to 'find a way out' of.

I'll weigh in a bit

Since DMOZ is dependent on site submission and acceptance of legitimate sites, I don't think there is a clear line on who serves whom. If I'm a user of the data, then I would want legitimate sites of interest included, otherwise the ODP has no value to me as a searcher.

If I can't get a response to a submission I may have made, and get frustrated by the process, then the directory will suffer to the extent that real sites that might be of interest and value to a searcher are NOT in the index.

There is a somewhat symbiotic relationship here, searchers and submitters need each other. I say this as both, but my frustration is as a submitter.

My wife runs a legitimate consulting company, and gets some of her business by referrals from her web site. I submitted her site 10 months ago, and it still is not in the ODP, with no feedback on why. I'm not gaming the system or trying to get an unfair advantage.

I want maximum exposure for her site in all the search engines, including those that use ODP data. But, it is not in the directory, perhaps because of some error or failure on my part, I don't know.

There has to be some form of feedback loop to assist those that have submitted sites.

Russ

russanderson said:

Since DMOZ is dependent on site submission and acceptance of legitimate sites

Click to expand...

This is not the case. ODP editors are expected to search out and find sites to fill categories on their own and to not rely on suggestions. I would say over 50% of listing I have added were never suggested, I found them by doing my own searches, and from links on related sites.

True, but that still leaves a large amount of the directory dependent on submissions. And, there are niche sites, specialized in a particular field, and it would be unrealistic for any of us to expect the editors to know about all the possible iterations within a category.

bekahm said:

This is not the case. ODP editors are expected to search out and find sites to fill categories on their own and to not rely on suggestions. I would say over 50% of listing I have added were never suggested, I found them by doing my own searches, and from links on related sites.

Click to expand...

And that is why we have the possibility for anyone to suggest a site.
The intention was that people would suggest sites that they thought would be of interest to us. Reality is that most of the times websiteowners are suggesting their site and want us to list it. But that is not what the suggestions are designed for.

That's a good point, but in reality, the general public does not even know that ODP exists, yet whether they know it or not, they are reliant on it, to some extent for relevant search results.

So, while the original intent was to have other searchers suggest sites, the practical application is that site owners, like myself, are suggesting sites. I have a vested interest in my site getting in the directory, and frankly, I'm not ashamed of that.

I would suggest that if the ODP relied on editor and general public suggestion for inclusion, the value of the service to the other search engines and the searchers themselves would be significantly diminished.

I think that the true value is not in who submits a site, whether it be a site owner or a surfer or an editor. It is the actual human review that is so critical.

But, the system, much like the US legal system has flaws. For all its flaws, though, it still is probably better than some of the other alternatives out there.

All I'm saying is I think it is important to recognize that there is a dynamic interdependency in the system. Recognition of that should drive processes. One of the processes that is missing is a consistent feedback loop.

While there are resource limitations to what can be done, I would hope there is some effort to improve the process, particularly as it relates to site suggestions.

So, that being said, this is probably a purely academic discussion, and a nice change of pace from doing my regular job. Thanks for the forum.

R--

Russ:

Good, thoughtful post. Thank you.

I would suggest that if the ODP relied on editor and general public suggestion for inclusion, the value of the service to the other search engines and the searchers themselves would be significantly diminished.

Click to expand...

I think you would find that most editors agree, which is why as editors gain experience in building categories and finding sites they often rely less and less upon the suggestions.

I think that the true value is not in who submits a site, whether it be a site owner or a surfer or an editor. It is the actual human review that is so critical.

Click to expand...

Total agreement, we really don't care who submits a site, and the identity of the submitter is not a significant factor in reviewing the average suggestion.

All I'm saying is I think it is important to recognize that there is a dynamic interdependency in the system. Recognition of that should drive processes. One of the processes that is missing is a consistent feedback loop.

Click to expand...

Ahh, but we get that. In a perverse sense, the louder the spammers cry, the better the job that we know we are doing. We also get that in watching the growth and quality of the directory. We see it in the update requests, and we see it here in the forum when we delist a site as part of a move, and it is not immediately relisted. We just don't do surveys and focus groups. We also don't pay a lot of attention to the professional ODP bashers who frequent the webmaster forums.

But, the system, much like the US legal system has flaws. For all its flaws, though, it still is probably better than some of the other alternatives out there.

Click to expand...

Thank you for that observation.

I would just like to pick up on one other point, here:

russanderson said:

If I'm a user of the data, then I would want legitimate sites of interest included, otherwise the ODP has no value to me as a searcher.

Click to expand...

I 100% agree with you.

If I can't get a response to a submission I may have made, and get frustrated by the process, then the directory will suffer to the extent that real sites that might be of interest and value to a searcher are NOT in the index.

Click to expand...

Ah but what about all the other sites which are out there which haven't been submitted yet and which no editor has found? By your logic, the directory would be flawed if every site on a subject was not listed. It's really not dependant on whether it is submitted or not, from the point of view of a user of the directory. Do you see what I mean?

Every good site that is added to the directory makes it better. Every good site which has not yet been added to the directory shows that the directory is not perfect (with which I think no-one will disagree) and there is room for improvement.

hot & Sour

bekahm said:

This is not the case. ODP editors are expected to search out and find sites to fill categories on their own and to not rely on suggestions. I would say over 50% of listing I have added were never suggested, I found them by doing my own searches, and from links on related sites.

Click to expand...

this is why we respect you all so much ... to all of you ODP editors

pvgool said:

The intention was that people would suggest sites that they thought would be of interest to us. Reality is that most of the times websiteowners are suggesting their site and want us to list it. But that is not what the suggestions are designed for.

Click to expand...

and this is why many webmasters hate you, because you dont recognize their contribution to ODP.

spectregunner said:

In a perverse sense, the louder the spammers cry, the better the job that we know we are doing.

Click to expand...

sorry spectregunner, I have highest regard for most of your views posted on this forum elsewhere. But here you are becoming slightly harsh to lot of genuine web masters (I am not including my self in any of categories genuine or spammer, nor do I need any certificate from anyone ).

rkhare said:

and this is why many webmasters hate you, because you dont recognize their contribution to ODP.

Click to expand...

Well, I have a slightly different viewpoint.

Most webmasters are interested in promoting their site. That goes for SEOs, too. You read their fora and mostly what they are concerned with is "gaming" the system, to get as much profit for themselves or their customers as possible.

Google uses the ODP data in some way to influence its search engine results. The exact details of this are source for a lot of speculation and crystal ball gazing on the part of the aforementioned webmasters and SEOs. But whatever that is, a listing in the ODP is perceived to improve the placings of their sites.

The ODP isn't interested in Website marketing. It's not geared up to service the needs of webmasters, and so it very consciously does not listen to the demands of site owners for listings, and does not offer services to people whose interest is in site promotion (such as the one you are suggesting).

In summary, in my opinion, the reason why Webmasters and SEOs hate the ODP so much (and I agree that there is a very vocal group that hate the ODP) is because they can't use it in the way they want to promote their own sites.

But I disagree with your assertion that the majority of webmasters hate the ODP. Do you have some sort of numbers to back this up? I think the vocal ones mostly hate the ODP, yes. But there are so, so very many webmasters out there who never ever post on a forum....

The measure of an organization is not the number but the quality of its enemies. And the ODP has all the right enemies....