what stops?

>You're also assuming that 100% of the editors joined had only one site (an obviously low estimate).

Yes, that may be a low estimate. But in this context it's valid.

Look at it like this: a webmaster may have joined only to add his site. But if he doesn't add any sites except his own, adding multiple sites of his own in his first category, then the chances of getting caught and cleaned up are very high. And if he ends up adding good sites other than his own, then it's kind of hard to say he joined only to add his own sites.

So, eliminating the idiots who joined and added multiple personal sites (they are the ones who ARE removed and cleansed), and the folk who ended up adding other sites (we call them "real editors"), all you have, for all practical purposes, is some number less than 75000 editors who might have added their own site, subtlely enough not to not been spotted by internal or external category visitors.

And it's so very easy to spot such cretins in a small category, even a non meta can do it, .

Yes, that is something anyone can do, whether or not they're an editor.

And BECAUSE it's something anyone can do, nobody has to take anyone's word for it. They can go look.

And BECAUSE anyone can go look, then anyone who claims there IS mass corruption -- either hasn't looked for himself, or has looked and has found nothing (and is therefore lying through his pedipalps, saying the thing he cannot possibly know to be true) -- or he has looked, and has found it.

If he's found it, he can report the abuse and see what happens. If he doesn't report, he's in collusion with the abusers and has no reason whatsoever to complain: instead, all honest people ought to complain about him for knowing how to help -- and deliberately refusing to help.

Logically, there are no other possibilities.

blindnoob said:

What stops someone from becoming an Editor and then submitting their own site into a category for SEO googleness? :icon_ques

Click to expand...

DMOZ doesnt help your rankings in Google

No more so than links from other sites, anyway.

Well, for a wannabe-abuser, it doesn't MATTER what the reality is -- how much (if any) the ODP actually will help a site in Google. What matters is what the abuser believes.(*) And if he believes the ODP is the Key to the Secrets of the Top Ten Google Ranking -- he's not going to be successfully disabused until AFTER he's abused successfully.

The reason spam is so prevalent in Google search results is not that spammers are so perspicacious. It's that there are so many spammers believing so many different things that no matter what the reality is, someone accidentally does something effective--likely as not, for the wrong reason.

(*)Yes, this fact has broader implications.

brmehlman said:

No more so than links from other sites, anyway.

Click to expand...

Can you prove that? Because many can prove otherwise. I dont want to argue, nor does it matter to me. The fact remains it does effect Google more so than a "link from other sites." Google even admits that links from different sites hold different weight. Link quality is admitedly a part of their algorithm. I honestly dont care, it's just bothers me that statement is made a lot here. I am not sure if people here really believe it or if it is just said to detour trolls.

Hutch as for what you said, I make no argument there. Although that was not the point I was trying to make. I made sure I worded my statement very simply.

DMOZ editors are just collectors and organizers of information, nothing more.

Most of the arguments I see in here have to do with how Google uses the information we collect, and that their directory is a mirror of ODP, so any site suggestions or updates have to be made through us.

We're independent of Google, completely separate with our own agenda, and yet we get blamed for and held accountable for what Google does.

It seems to me like most of these complaints should be made to Google, not to ODP editors.

chaz7979 said:

Can you prove that? Because many can prove otherwise. I dont want to argue, nor does it matter to me.

Click to expand...

If it doesn't matter than why ask?
Here is an example from my personal experience, and doesn't really mean anything to anyone (including me) but it does show some evidence that dmoz doesn't really effect PR more than anything else:
I have three sites that I maintain:

1. My ODP Editor Site
2. My personal family site
3. One commercial site I do for free for a friend.

The only one of these three sites listed in dmoz is #2 and its been there for a couple of years if I recall correctly. Neither of the other two have ever been suggested to dmoz for a public listing (at least not by myself or anyone else that I am aware of), nor have they been suggested to any other directory.
#1 shows today a PR of 5, #2 today returned PR 2, and the #3 is PR 0 (not surprising, as I have only recently put it together and its not marketed at all).
#2 (only listed dmoz site) returns a link report of:

# Google Links: 0
# Yahoo Links: 38
# MSN Links: 8

Click to expand...

while #1 (not listed) returns

# Google Links: 21
# Yahoo Links: 251
# MSN Links: 10

Click to expand...

and of course #3 hasn't got any links. So if a listing in dmoz is more important than others I don't see it. In fact the only listed site in dmoz, returns zero links on Google.

My belief (only based on what I've heard from other sources) is that the only benefit an ODP listing has towards page-rank calculations is that which arises from the visible link(s) it results in. This may of course be worth more than a single link on an average website for two reasons:

(1) The ODP may well be weighted by google as a 'trustworthy' site, so it's links may be worth more than those from other less trusted sites (but the same positive weighting applies to other sites, such as acedemic sites and the BBC).

(2) Lots of other people provide online copies of the ODP directory, which results in lots of additional links (though these days Google's duplicate content filters probably negate much of this effect).

Crowbar,

Just for the record I do not blame the ODP nor am I complaining. I just want to set the record straight. If you take 2 identical sites and get 1 site listed in the ODP and give the other site a link on an equal targeted page with the same PR the site with the ODP link will rank higher. That is fact. I do not wish to blame or hold the ODP accountable, that is on Google. I also do not think that the way Google uses the data is wrong either. I think it is a perfectly good idea... one that I think my fail in the future...but until now it has been great use of the ODP.

Understood, chaz7979, I was refering more to threads in general, .

I'm dumb as a rock when it comes to all this computer stuff, search engines, rankings, ect. I admire any of you guys that do understand it, and I'm sure it's an industry of its own, .

So, Chaz, what you're saying, in effect, is that Google decided the ODP was the best directory for it's (Google's) purposes and that if and until Google throws more weight toward another directory, ODP is THE place to be listed ... for Google SE/PR advantage?

If you take 2 identical sites and get 1 site listed in the ODP and give the other site a link on an equal targeted page with the same PR the site with the ODP link will rank higher.

Click to expand...

So you're saying that if there is a site which has a mirror, and the site is listed in ODP, the mirror is not ranked as highly in Google. Continuing with your assumption, I'd say that there are two possibilities:

1. ODP attempts whenever possible to figure out which is the primary site and lists it, not the mirror. Perhaps Google knows this and gives greater weight to the ODP site.

2. Google can figure out for itself which is the primary site and gives it greater weight, which happens to be the same site which ODP also figured out is the primary site.

I have serious doubts that you can take how Google handles mirrors and compare it to how it handles two sites, each with unique content and draw conclusions. That is comparing apples and oranges.

ODP is THE place to be listed ... for Google SE/PR advantage

Click to expand...

But that's not an ODP or a public problem; that's just an incompetent marketroid's problem.

And it is to the benefit of everyone else on earth that he fails.

Think of it like a bank. If I don't have money, I go to a bank, because that's where the money is. Is it the bank's problem that I do that? And is it the bank's problem that they refuse to give me anything, even though they give money to other people that are both more polite than me and less good-looking than me -- while with all my attention to cosmetics, all my bluster, all my demands, all my rants, all my political rabble-rousing, no matter how many times I join the line, no matter how long I stand in line, they give me nothing?

Or is it my problem that I am just too stupid to understand how a bank works?

hutcheson said:

But that's not an ODP or a public problem; that's just an incompetent marketroid's problem.

Click to expand...

And Google's decision/choice. Not DMOZ/ODP's.

I joined to list my site...

Well technically not since I already had 9 deeplinks in DMOZ to my website (hey its a big 2000 pages multilangauge, multitopic website ) before I even applied but since I like to mess with my website a lot I decide it wasn't fair of me to annoy people each time I change URLs.

And besides I wanted to get few more addicts to my weird hobbies and promote my obscure niches which resulted in two more deeplinks to my very cool website (TM) beside almost 500 other websites I've added, hopefully giving these cool but forgotten websites some publicity. :angel:

For my next shameless self-promotion stunt I was planning to add two website I've been working on with my friend besides some 200 other websites which have been missing in certain category but (un)fortunately I got removed as editor which wasn't that bad since now I have more time to build my websites which I can then submit to DMOZ that is if its ever gets back.

So this crash is sort of punishment for removing me (nothing personal anyone who crossed me suffered similar fate with bad luck following them around). :evil: :bigevil: :bigevil:

chaos127 said:

My belief (only based on what I've heard from other sources) is that the only benefit an ODP listing has towards page-rank calculations is that which arises from the visible link(s) it results in. This may of course be worth more than a single link on an average website for two reasons:

(1) The ODP may well be weighted by google as a 'trustworthy' site, so it's links may be worth more than those from other less trusted sites (but the same positive weighting applies to other sites, such as acedemic sites and the BBC).

(2) Lots of other people provide online copies of the ODP directory, which results in lots of additional links (though these days Google's duplicate content filters probably negate much of this effect).

Click to expand...

From personal experience one average PR from niche related link is worth more then thousand link in DMOZ (well maybe not thousands but dozen for certain), my website has 11 deeplinks in DMOZ and effect of all of them is almost non-existent while single niche link can give me huge boost in both traffic and SE ranking.