suggestions

[inquirersg]

im just shooting my mouth here since i have no idea whats going on inside dmoz

so please bear with me

 

1) automated script to check for dead links and links that redirect

 

i think this should have been brought up before in the past...guess i will just bring it up again

 

tools::

there are also some webmaster websites that lets you input a url and they will check it for broken links, or theres some scripts available too

 

2) accept only domains/sites above 2 years old...

 

this should really cut short the submission queue and have some sort of barrier against spam. i am willing to bet that a significant number of new websites created around the world...never operates more then 2 years.

 

most common reasons are the webmaster abandons it or got bored and stops updating it or changes the site into something else altogether or the website gets sold to someone else and became about something else...etc etc

 

i run a 2 year old blog and i know the dedication and passion required to keep it alive, it feels almost like a unpaid job sometimes

 

tools::

i think whois domain to check for domain age and maybe web archive to see what the website was like in the past, but not everyone lets web archive spider their sites

 

ok thats all i have to say, its too bad that google is using your website because you guys have a volunteer based directory that operates on idealism, this is no match for the amount of attention google brings, and i can tell its slowly tearing apart the whole project

[spectregunner]

automated script to check for dead links and links that redirect

 

Robozilla is our automated link checker. We also have one that checks for redirects.

 

 

accept only domains/sites above 2 years old...

 

 

irrelevant.

 

It isn't how old it is, it is how much unique content it has.

[inquirersg]

ideally a site's age would not be a factor...ideally

[motsa]

idealism has nothing to do with it. The age of a site is irrelevant to how worthy it is of listing.

[inquirersg]

if you have a finite number of volunteers who work for free against a very very very large number of websites being submitted, i think you need to make the submissions manageable or

1) lose control of the quality of the directory because theres no 'room' for the editors to do maintenance on all the existing categories

2)over time start to become irrelevant as the submission queue builds up into tens of thousands and the good websites simply stay lost in queue..while some categories remain -not updated/outdated- for years

 

its just being practical

 

with such a large number of submissions, a organization can try having higher standards so that the sheer amount of submissions drop and become manageable again. and try getting enough new editors to keep up with the submissions coming in

[crowbar]

Another possibility would be to shut off all submissions in 3 month spans so we could devote our time to catching up and category maintainance, a fine and sensible solution by a brilliant editor (who shall modestly remain unnamed).

[pvgool]

and try getting enough new editors to keep up with the submissions coming in

Why would we try such a thing.

The suggestions (what ou call submissions) are only one of many sources editors can use to find listable sites. And in many categories it isn't a good source.

The easiest way to "keep up" with suggestions is to stop accepting them. Something some editors would prefer to happen.

[inquirersg]

well...anything that makes the submission queue manageable again, im just shooting off here since i got no say anyway,lol, and venting some frustration on being 1)unable to get my site reviewed 2)rejected as an editor

[inquirersg]

The suggestions (what you call submissions) are only one of many sources editors can use to find listable sites. And in many categories it isn't a good source.

 

the unfortunate thing is that its going to 'be this way' as long as the submission remains "this way"

 

The easiest way to "keep up" with suggestions is to stop accepting them. Something some editors would prefer to happen.

 

this will work too...

[pvgool]

well...anything that makes the submission queue manageable again,

For editors the current pools of suggestions are manageble. We use them if we want or we don't use them if we don't want.

 

BTW they are not queues. A queue would imply that there is an order in the number of suggestions. There isn't. We can view suggestions by category, some editors can look at suggestions of several categories at the same time. And we can chose to look at them in several different sort orders, date of suggestion only being one of them.

 

If you only want to become an editor to work on the pools of suggestions you might be disappointed when you become an editor. An editors "task" is to build a category. Listing new sites is only part of that task, getting these new sites form the suggestion pool is even a smaller part.

[inquirersg]

i see, i thought there was tons of suggestions to process thats why the categories don't get updated

 

are you saying that an editor is able to add sites outside those suggested ?? i always thought it was a suggestion->editor process

 

also how to let an editor know of good sites if the suggestion queue is like xxxx long

[pvgool]

i see, i thought there was tons of suggestions to process thats why the categories don't get updated

Yes, certainly in some categories, there are tons of suggestions. But there are also ton of sites that are listable but don't get suggested. We want to list these sites also.

If a category does not get updated it only means that nobody (editor or non-editor) was interested enough to do some work in that category. But at the same time many other categories get updated. Editors tend to look at the big picture (the complete directory) for growth and not at small pieces (single categories).

 

are you saying that an editor is able to add sites outside those suggested ?? i always thought it was a suggestion->editor process

Ofcourse we can add sites from outside of the pools of suggested sites. This is in many case more profitable and rewarding.

 

also how to let an editor know of good sites if the suggestion queue is like xxxx long

That is something people suggesting sites can influence.

Most sites get suggested with very poor titles and descriptions. Sites suggested with good (meaning compliant to our guidelines) stand out amongst the rest and will in many cases be handled faster by editors.

But we can only know if a site is "good" after we reviewed it.

[crowbar]

Nicely said, pvgool, . I agree wholeheartedly.

[inquirersg]

ok, thanks for your replies everyone, and thanks for putting up with my suggestions lol