.........this is a joke right???

graphx · Dec 20, 2006

quote"The Open Directory Project is the largest, most comprehensive human-edited directory of the Web. It is constructed and maintained by a vast, global community of volunteer editors...........The web continues to grow at staggering rates. Automated search engines are increasingly unable to turn up useful results to search queries. The small paid editorial staffs at commercial directory sites can't keep up with submissions, and the quality and comprehensiveness of their directories has suffered. Link rot is setting in and they can't keep pace with the growth of the Internet"quote

Wow...:thumb1: could've fooled me! Seems to me dmoz is the one not keeping up with the rest of them.
You have got to be kidding me! This seems to be the only way to be listed with AOL search and been broken for about two months now! WHAT A JOKE. Which is why I dont WASTE my time with aol search's of my own but sad to say a lot of people (and potential customers of mine) do. Within three weeks I was top ranked for all my keywords chosen in all other major engines but still no listing whatsoever for AOL. What a dissapointment. Hard to believe they base their search engine database on a faulty, unstable and unreliable service such as dmoz. Honestly no offense to the hard work of the volunteer editors but I would'nt waste my time volunteering simply because it seems to me the motto here should be "1 step forward....28 steps back." Sorry, just my own opinion!

Edward · Dec 20, 2006

I wonder why you bothered to take the time to post in that case. The public side is up and running, and editors are working again.

Hard to believe they base their search engine database on a faulty, unstable and unreliable service such as dmoz.

Perhaps you should ask AOL about that, but I don't think it is unstable or unreliable.

photofox · Dec 20, 2006

It's unfortunate you feel that way graphx, the technical problems have been frustrating for everyone, but as Edward mentioned editing access has been restored and the remaining issues are being worked on.

I'd like to remind you about our Posting Guidelines. This forum was not established as a place for people to rant about how the ODP runs itself, or how the use of ODP data affects peoples search engine rankings.

We are happy to answer any questions you might have as long as they fall within the scope of this forum.

Thanks.

graphx · Dec 20, 2006

I agree that was a little harsh I'm just very frustrated. Apologies to whom I've affended through my posting.
Is there any other way to be submitted to aol other than through dmoz?

pvgool · Dec 20, 2006

graphx said:
Is there any other way to be submitted to aol other than through dmoz?

We don't know. This forums is only about DMOZ.
You should ask AOL about their activities.

crowbar · Dec 20, 2006

I don't quite understand all this page ranking stuff, but, it seems kind of weird that so many people expect to have their particular sites be first in line, over everybody else. Is this a "Who can I bribe or badger situation"?

What about ordinary non professional site builders? It seems awful selfish and egotistical that only the pros should be found first in a search, because they're more deserving.

It's a little tiresome to have the outfit who's doing all the real work for free, to keep getting blamed for the ineptness of a professional site builder to get his sites ranked higher in a search engine that we have nothing whatsoever to do with.

Eric-the-Bun · Dec 20, 2006

Seems to me dmoz is the one not keeping up with the rest of them

There are now thousands of people literally churning out websites in an effort to make money through on-line selling. They have no unique content and we will never list them. I am convinced

that we are keeping up with not listing them. In the area of good quality informative sites that are worth listing, we are, as always, on course as the DMOZ requirement for listing these is based on an editor review in the fullness of time.

Were DMOZ to be a listing service equivalent to a telephone directory, it would be a failure. However it was set up precisely to counter the professional spammers who were clogging up the search engine results. We leave the telephone directory aspects to those organisations who have undertaken to provide that sort of service. There are a lot of them out there, many of them also offer free listings and some of them supply data to the big players.

regards

crowbar · Dec 20, 2006

Do you have any questions about how to write ODP compliant title/descriptions, graphx, or choosing a category to submit a site suggestion to?

You can improve your chances of a possible listing, and perhaps the speed of the process overall by doing so.

David E · Dec 20, 2006

graphx said:
quote"The Open Directory Project is the largest, most comprehensive human-edited directory of the Web. It is constructed and maintained by a vast, global community of volunteer editors...........The web continues to grow at staggering rates. Automated search engines are increasingly unable to turn up useful results to search queries. The small paid editorial staffs at commercial directory sites can't keep up with submissions, and the quality and comprehensiveness of their directories has suffered. Link rot is setting in and they can't keep pace with the growth of the Internet"quote

Wow...:thumb1: could've fooled me! Seems to me dmoz is the one not keeping up with the rest of them.
You have got to be kidding me! This seems to be the only way to be listed with AOL search and been broken for about two months now! WHAT A JOKE. Which is why I dont WASTE my time with aol search's of my own but sad to say a lot of people (and potential customers of mine) do. Within three weeks I was top ranked for all my keywords chosen in all other major engines but still no listing whatsoever for AOL. What a dissapointment. Hard to believe they base their search engine database on a faulty, unstable and unreliable service such as dmoz. Honestly no offense to the hard work of the volunteer editors but I would'nt waste my time volunteering simply because it seems to me the motto here should be "1 step forward....28 steps back." Sorry, just my own opinion!

Dmoz has absolutley nothing to do with Aol's search result's I am not listed in Dmoz and my Aol search results are excellent.

hutcheson · Dec 21, 2006

I am not listed in Dmoz and my Aol search results are excellent.

Now THAT'S a joke. We used to tell a similar one about the guy protecting himself from man-eating tigers by snapping his fingers. (He knew it had worked because he'd never been eaten.)

David E · Dec 21, 2006

Wht's so funny about it, I don't get what you are saying!

hutcheson · Dec 21, 2006

It's a logician's joke.

avh · Dec 26, 2006

dmoz is back and editors are working

And if we're lucky, the 7k+ editors will add a whooping 21k sites in january 2007

I imagine the first 3 weeks are for the 3 sites that each editor has to add, and the 4th week is for a well deserved rest

crowbar · Dec 26, 2006

I added over 200 sites the first three days I edited, avh. I could change that, I've got lots of other things I could be doing with my free time.

motsa · Dec 26, 2006

imagine the first 3 weeks are for the 3 sites that each editor has to add, and the 4th week is for a well deserved rest

Huh? Where does it say that editors have to add 3 sites (over 3 weeks or anything else)?

pvgool · Dec 26, 2006

I guess he thinks that our minimal activity of 1 edit in 4 months can all be done in the first weeks of a new year. Or maybe he just hasn't a clue what he is talking about. We probably never will know.

wjcampbe · Dec 26, 2006

Almost definitely a misread of the requirement to give three example sites in an new editor application.

Strange interpretation - but there you go

jjwill · Dec 26, 2006

avh said:
And if we're lucky, the 7k+ editors will add a whooping 21k sites in january 2007

I imagine the first 3 weeks are for the 3 sites that each editor has to add, and the 4th week is for a well deserved rest

Oh shoot! I better delist 200 sites since I went over my quota of 3.

David E · Dec 26, 2006

All editors should review at least 10 sites a week, one every 4 months is a joke.

pvgool · Dec 26, 2006

Why?
All editors are volunteers who spend as much time as they personaly want on DMOZ.
BTW the rule is not "review 1 site every 4 months" but "do 1 edit every 4 months". Some reviews are not counted as an edit for this rule and most things that count as an edits are not reviews of suggested sites.

.........this is a joke right???

graphx

Member

Edward

Member

photofox

Curlie Admin

graphx

Member

pvgool

kEditall/kCatmv

crowbar

Member

Eric-the-Bun

crowbar

Member

David E

Member

hutcheson

David E

Member

hutcheson

avh

Member

crowbar

Member

motsa

pvgool

kEditall/kCatmv

wjcampbe

Member

jjwill

Member

David E

Member

pvgool

kEditall/kCatmv