WebProNews article on the DMOZ

News articles on the DMOZ?

WOW!!!!!!! could not believe what I recently read in Chris Richardson's article from http://www.webpronews.com/
Thought it sounds all to familiar??? does anyone really think it's true?

We're fairly open.

We even have this forum where people can check ask questions and check on there status. What the SEO people sometimes forget is that we aren't providing a service for submitters. We accept submissions because it helps us build a better directory for our users.

"do you not think you would be even more satisfied if the millions of sites that didn't make it into dmoz were available for you when you search? Think of all the bargains you are missing, think of all the information, research and technical data that is NOT available on dmoz due to its behavior."

Click to expand...

When I search on Google or other engines, one of the problems is all the sites that turn up that I'm not interested in. One of the great values of a directory is the choosing and grouping of sites, which is what our human editors do.

The search engines do have more sites than we do, and people are free to use them. People with can submit directly to Google, Froogle, or any of a host of other search engines. One does not have to submit to Dmoz to get into the Google search engine, only to get into the directory.

As for the issue of editor abuse. We admit that it does sometimes happen. However, it's not out of control. There are ways to report it. When it is reported it we look into it. Quite a few editors have been removed for abuse.

The talk about the ODP in webmaster/SEO forums is largely going to be negative so if that's where a writer is going for research for an article, he's going to get a mighty one-sided view...as this writer did.

Regarding editor abuse, people who don't report it have no business griping about it occurring. We take it very seriously but we can't deal with it if we don't know about it.

Why do you feel it would only be negative? I think Chris did some research here and took testimonials from real peoples experiences. He didn't even particularly express his own views, but rather the publics! The article was not only about abuse of editors. Did you even read the article?

I can understand how you feel Rose. If I were told:

1. It is vitally important for a site to be listed in directory X. A site will get absolutely nowhere without a listing in that directory. E-commercial success depends entirely on a listing in directory X.

2. Directory X is maintained by volunteers. There are never enough of them to cope with all the spam submissions they get because the directory is free. So it may take years for a suggested site to be reviewed.

I would start wondering if the Internet had gone completely mad. But the truth is rather different.

No. 1 is not true. A link from Yahoo is just as good as a link from the ODP for all the purposes that e-commercial sites want links for. And there are plenty of other directories that would love to list your site for a fee.

Not only that - Google and other SES take advertising, which I understand can be effective. Google also offers a feed to Froogle for shopping sites. And there are other options for site promotion.

In the article i found this:

Con's:
"Dmoz really is a corrupt system. If the editor in the category has a site in that same category, he'll simply deny any application in the interest of defeating competition."
"I submitted under a heading only to learn 3 months later that the #3 player in my market was the editor. So I picked another heading..."
"Dmoz should be burned in the fires it was forged."
"I submitted in early June... should I check back at Christmas?"

Pro's:
"To be fair, every editor that volunteers to DMOZ isn't going to mistreat your submission, although it may be awhile before it gets approved."
"Granted, not every testimonial I read was negative. A thread on the Digital Point forums spoke of a DMOZ editor assisting a web site owner in the approval process. The poster had waited about 3 months and still no approval, so they decided to email the category editor. After receiving the mailing, the editor "promptly added [the] site to dmoz." So there is still hope.
The thing I'm left wondering is if all it took was an email to get the approval going, what was going on the 3 months beforehand? Was the editor that busy?"

Questions: Why all pro's are quickly folowed by a negative comment? And why all con's are presented as clear facts? Is this the way to write an objective article?

Why do you feel it would only be negative? I think Chris did some research here and took testimonials from real peoples experiences.

Click to expand...

All he did was pull comments from various forum threads. Not a lot of research involved in that.

He didn't even particularly express his own views

Click to expand...

Sure he did. You can't write an editorial article like that without including your own opinions.

Did you even read the article?

Click to expand...

Yes, I did. Did you? You might like to reread it because it doesn't seem like we were reading the same thing. Like miromulus, I wonder why the few non-negatives had to be qualified by the writer's cynical opinions but, hey, it's not like it was meant to be a love letter to the ODP.

We'll get over it.

WebProWorld article

WebProWorld has an interesting discussion about DMOZ.

Some people think they are being kept off the open directory because their competitors become editors and act as gate keepers to keep the competition off. I find it hard to believe anyone would be that dumb since that is a federal crime under the category of restraint of trade (Illegally interfering with free marketplace participation. Regulated by the Federal Trade Commission). It would be so easy to prosecute. If it ever came to that, noone would be willing to be an editor and that would end the Open Directory.

Correction. Discussion is in WebProNews

Intersting article at http://www.WebProNews.com

there is a very interesting article in regards to DMOZ at the home page of

http://www.WebProNews.com

i wonder if there is any truth to it.......very interesting....

That some sites can wait months or years after being created before being reviewed? That's the fundamental fact; we'd tell you that here. The article doesn't mention that.

Instead, it's just another whine about editors that do what they do instead of what webmasters want them to do. Well, that part is true enough.

The bit about "ODP is dead" is really true, in the sense of the original "God is dead" theological statement -- (i.e. not "no longer existing", but "no longer interested in any way in us".)

So, yes, the article is true. And, by the way, WebProNews is dead -- it has ceased altogether to offer valuable hymnological material to the surfer.

What's that you say? It never did? It never claimed that mission? Nobody there cares about that mission?

OK, then. Next subject. Millions of webmasters are dead, and there's nothing I'd like to do more than bury them.

What's that you say? Scriiiitch.....

It's a big web. There's room for webpronews. There's room for millions of affiliating/doorway/drop-shoving/banner-farming spammers. There's even room for millions of websites offering unique goods and services, and an ODP that links to them. We don't all have to resell SMC-klitch.

I believe there is one more thread with the same subject.

Right you are, there. Thought we might as well combine all of the threads into one (one dupe thread was the three posts directly above this one and the other dupe thread is the post right above that).

WoW! I think Chris struck a vain here. I can't believe all the editors etc etc. weighing in to defend there view point (and even some wanting to snuff out the world) one even thinks they know LAW! Well guess well have to see if anyone gets prosecuted, or crucified!

Some people think they are being kept off the open directory because their competitors become editors and act as gate keepers to keep the competition off. I find it hard to believe anyone would be that dumb since that is a federal crime under the category of restraint of trade (Illegally interfering with free marketplace participation. Regulated by the Federal Trade Commission). It would be so easy to prosecute.

Click to expand...

It would be impossible to prosecute for many reason. One being that no one editor owns a category, they are merely the listed editor in a particular category. There are hundreds of editors who can and do edit in any category of their choice without being listed as an editor for the category. There can also be several editors listed for one category.

The OPD can not and does not "Illegally interfering with free marketplace participation," regardless of if a site ever gets listed or not. Not possible under its current incarnation.

the truth

you know I have been in the website making business for five years now and search engine submission with dmoz has always been a headache....its like a crap shoot....maybe you will get placed and maybe you wont ....I guess it just depends on the mood of the editor for that day...because I have submitted sites ranging from ecommerce to basic websites ....and for the most part they get included in DMOZ..but when they don't its just plain confusing as to the reason ..being that i make all my sites the same way as the one before.....the problem with DMOZ is the human factor......when you leave decision making up to people ...things will always go wrong....just my 2 cents.......

cpv1st, I respect your decision. By the way, what species are you?

But before abusing us humans, you should perhaps note that you mentioned several irrelevant criteria but omitted all the criteria on which we actually base our decisions, so you can hardly expect to predict them accurately.

cpv1st said:

you know I have been in the website making business for five years now and search engine submission with dmoz has always been a headache....its like a crap shoot....maybe you will get placed and maybe you wont ....I guess it just depends on the mood of the editor for that day...because I have submitted sites ranging from ecommerce to basic websites ....and for the most part they get included in DMOZ..but when they don't its just plain confusing as to the reason ..being that i make all my sites the same way as the one before.....the problem with DMOZ is the human factor......when you leave decision making up to people ...things will always go wrong....just my 2 cents.......

Click to expand...

1. I don't understand how is this post related to this thread
2. People can make mistakes, but (I assume you are human) are you sure the wrong decision is not yours?
3. Maybe DMOZ has problems but they are trying to solve them. And they can solve the problems because they are humans . Try to email Google or MSN and tell me the answer .
4. Are you sure that your unlisted sites are not sill in queue waiting an editor?

This is for all the businessmen:

You all know the laws of the market. If a company is making to many mistakes it will eventualy die. DMOZ is a nonprofit organization, but commercial sites (like Yahoo) are in the same market. Let the best man win. If DMOZ is unworthy of it's current status it will eventualy disappear (not very soon, I hope).

All the above is just my opinion.

If there are certain criteria to be met...than all you need is a algorithm for a completely automated listing....this will give every one a fair chance to get listed...and not a listing that will be based on one editors point of view vs. another. Just like the above mentioned article stated

"human prejudices can factor into the approval process"

Click to expand...

and this is the 'people' factor that I am making reference too. not a species.....maybe its not so much a people factor and more of a volunteer factor.....and in reference to this statement

You all know the laws of the market. If a company is making to many mistakes it will eventually die. DMOZ is a nonprofit organization, but commercial sites (like Yahoo) are in the same market. Let the best man win. If DMOZ is unworthy of it's current status it will eventually disappear (not very soon, I hope).

Click to expand...

well search engines that use DMOZ data such as Netscape, aol, etc are dropping in popularity and are usually lower ranking search engines. Yahoo has made a major come back with google being the only search engine a few percentage points ahead of yahoo but google as well is slowly dropping. I'm not so sure it a "Let the best man win" situation, as it is more of professional issue. Volunteer Editors vs. Paid Editors......

I never have to email the other search engines...because there is never any problems getting listed .......

DMOZ is a nonprofit organization, but commercial sites (like Yahoo) are in the same market. Let the best man win. If DMOZ is unworthy of it's current status it will eventualy disappear (not very soon, I hope).

Click to expand...

Well I have some disagreement with that. I don't think we are in the same market. Yahoo is a marketing tool and charges money - it is interested in webmasters and their bank accounts. DMOZ is not a marketing tool - it attempts to catalogue the Internet's best sites for the benefit of users of the Internet (surfers) and is not interested in webmasters or their commercial interests. We will survive because we are different. Even should Netscape ever pull the plug I am certain that the editors are that close a community that they would soon have it back online themselves, maybe with a slightly different name - you just can't outpoint an organisation with no costs, no commercial interests, and staffed by a dedicated army of fanatics.

It is like comparing public libraries to bookshops. People complain because the library doesn't have the bestseller they desperately want to read and predict the downfall of libraries because bookshops have more stock of today's bestsellers. But whilst bookshops might hate free lending libraries and see them as stealing trade, the libraries don't give two hoots about the bookshops, neither are they concerned about having only two copies of the latest Jeffrey Archer novel - they know their objective is to stock quality across a much broader spectrum and serve readers not publishers.
irate:

This will give every one a fair chance to get listed

Click to expand...

You may want everyone listed but noone has suggested that we do. There is no possible replacement for human discretion and we leave the algorithms to the search engines (which we are not one of). We don't want to list every site on any given topic but we do however want to be able to offer our users a wide coverage on a given topic. Where them sites come from is not important.

I never have to email the other search engines...because there is never any problems getting listed .......

Click to expand...

We are not a search engine and there is no guarentee or entitlement to be listed here.

You need to read up on the Open Directory Project and begin to understand what it is all about. We have a category at http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Searching/Directories/Open_Directory_Project/ which contains a wealth of information which may make th epicture less hazy.