interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 I'd be pleased if someone could help me resolve this issue, as I am certain it affects the whole DMOZ community. My first question is - Who can I report this problem to? Let me explain some detail to this issue.... In creating a submission to DMOZ, the guidelines suggest that you search DMOZ first to make sure your site is not included (step 2) before going onto look for an appropriate category to use (Step 3) so that you don't waste people's time. I have found that the search utility does not function correctly (either in the normal mode or the advanced) and I have tested this on the site - now, before you go off thinking "dumb user" - I'm an IT Consultant with 20 years experience and know all about boolean operators. Here's my example, please follow this through so that you can understand the issue... If you manually navigate through DMOZ using this path - Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/Derbyshire/Alfreton You will get to see 2 of my sites - Alfreton Business Directory and Alfreton News Publishing Service, however to find them using the search utility is impossible! I have tried using the following terms in both the normal mode and the advanced mode (allows you to specify if you are looking for sites or categories or both): Alfreton Business Alfreton Business Directory Alfreton Directory area 55 Area55 - (part of the url) <urls removed> and Alfreton News Alfreton News Publishing Service Alfreton Publishing You would expect that each are relevant / valid search terms that should show results and if I understand the help file correctly - the system automatically adds a boolean "AND" for multiple words on the query line. However, if I just search for Alfreton it does display a set of results - but having then looked through them all my sites are still not there! So as you can imagine - I'm a little confused and I guess there are thousands of other site owners looking to see if there site is listed, reaching a conclusion that its not and then submitting their site and creating a duplicate entry - which is bad news for all the editors out there! I look forward to any help and guidance.
jimnoble Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 Here's what I said to you by email on 09 June 2008 11:20 > I think there is something wrong with DMOZ's search utility. It's working correctly. It's intended to help people to find an appropriate category, not for anxious website owners to check whether or not their websites are listed. It works from the the RDF dump of our database which is generated approximately weekly. The search results can thus be a week or so out of date. If you search for Alfreton, you'll find the Alfreton category at the top of the list of results. Visit it and notice the date at the bottom of the page - which is when <url removed> was listed. Considering that you suggested it to entirely the wrong category, that's pretty good going. [the date at the bottom of the page was Tuesday, June 3, 2008] I'm sorry that you didn't believe me but you won't get a different answer here.
jimnoble Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 In an earlier email to you on the same day, I said <url removed> is already listed in our Alfreton category. That you've chosen to spread that website over multiple URLs doesn't make it eligible for multiple listings. Please do not suggest any of its subsections again. I see from the opening post that you've read our submission guidelines but you still seem to have missed the part that forbids the submission of related websites and the penalties that can be applied should it be ignored.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 Reply to Jim Hi Jim, It's not a question of whether I believe you or not. I am certain you have a great deal of knowledge about DMOZ. My issue is that the search utility does not work and if that's an issue related to the frequency of a cron job of a database dump, how many other people have this same issue and how much time do all the editors waste trying to answer these queries (not to mention your user base who are trying to check if there site is listed) - is not the issue to get the database to do a nightly dump? How hard is that? and how much time would it save you all and people like me? Honestly - I have never heard of an online database search utility that does not work on current data - and to find this on DMOZ, a highly trusted resource - it does nothing to inspire confidence in the DMOZ project! I disapprove of your comments that I won't get another answer here - What is the purpose of a forum if it's not to elicit different views and debate? sure, there may be people that agree or disagree - but somewhere, at some point, if this issue is not addressed and resolved, then people will turn away from the project in despair! and through social bookmarking it will create a negative impact on the project. I don't wish to see that happen and i'm sure others don't either. DMOZ needs to get a resolution to this issue fast. This is an issue that affects thousands of people everyday and I don't feel that your response addresses the key issue itself. As you state "It's intended to help people to find an appropriate category, not for anxious website owners to check whether or not their websites are listed." - I don't agree with your remarks nor the underlying attitude, in fact, I think it's offensive. Why does the submission guideline suggest you search to see if your site is included, if there is no way of doing that through a search utility that includes an option to be able to find information by "site only" or by keyword? There's no logic in that! Surely the purpose is to enable people like me who own multiple domains to check if there site is listed, to find the site quickly so that they can either update it if found and secondly not to re-submit it thinking it's not listed! I think DMOZ is just creating work for itself! Try to see it from my perspective Jim - I am your client. I wish to see if my site is listed or not and I also wish to do that through a reliable search tool - its a basic requirement of any website and i am amazed that DMOZ does not deliver in this instance!
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 I'm lost to what to you mean here Jim In an earlier email to you on the same day, I said I see from the opening post that you've read our submission guidelines but you still seem to have missed the part that forbids the submission of related websites and the penalties that can be applied should it be ignored. What website are you referring to? and which multiple domains are you referring to?
jimnoble Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 I am your client No you are not. Our 'clients' are downstream data users and surfers, not website owners.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 Who is a client of DMOZ? No you are not. Our 'clients' are downstream data users and surfers, not website owners. DMOZ provides a public service (that means anyone who interfaces with the project is your client) and invites people like me (a client) to submit my websites into your database for the benefit of common good (other clients). Which ever way you see DMOZ Jim, it's different to how others might view it. I am your client - as someone who submits information to the project, someone who owns websites and someone who surfs the Internet too. But this discussion is a distraction to the real issue.
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 The point is that the search, such as it is, works the way it was intended. Whether that's a good thing or not is a whole different matter. I disapprove of your comments that I won't get another answer here - What is the purpose of a forum if it's not to elicit different views and debate?Well, actually, this forum isn't like most forums. It's more a venue for editors to answer questions than it is a venue for debate. The problem is that you're looking for a different answer to a question that isn't open-ended. And discussion about how the search should work probably isn't going to be particularly helpful since the editors who post here don't have anything to do with the functioning of the search itself.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 What website are you referring to? and which multiple domains are you referring to?
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 The point is that the search, such as it is, works the way it was intended. Whether that's a good thing or not is a whole different matter. Well, actually, this forum isn't like most forums. It's more a venue for editors to answer questions than it is a venue for debate. The problem is that you're looking for a different answer to a question that isn't open-ended. And discussion about how the search should work probably isn't going to be particularly helpful since the editors who post here don't have anything to do with the functioning of the search itself. ..........which is why - the opening question of my post reads.... My first question is - Who can I report this problem to? If someone knows how this issue can be escalated, then please do so, or let me know how to.
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 I am your client - as someone who submits information to the project, someone who owns websites and someone who surfs the Internet too.No, you're really not. We invite you as a website owner to help us build the directory by allowing you to suggest your site for an editor to review but that doesn't make you a client. "Client" implies an obligation on our part to provide a service or product to you, which we don't. The only people who could truly be considered "clients" to the ODP are (a) the people who browse the directory looking for sites and (b) the sites that use our data.
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 If someone knows how this issue can be escalated, then please do so, or let me know how to.AOL is fully aware of any issues and suggestions surrounding the search tool on dmoz.org so there is no need to escalate anything.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 AOL is fully aware of any issues and suggestions surrounding the search tool on dmoz.org so there is no need to escalate anything. what issues?
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 No, you're really not. We invite you as a website owner to help us build the directory by allowing you to suggest your site for an editor to review but that doesn't make you a client. "Client" implies an obligation on our part to provide a service or product to you, which we don't. The only people who could truly be considered "clients" to the ODP are (a) the people who browse the directory looking for sites and (b) the sites that use our data. The service you provide to me is to provide me with a functional search tool - therefore i am a client.
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 *sigh* It was a general comment. Thanks for your suggestions for improving the search tool. Consider them all taken on board but this discussion has really run to conclusion. The service you provide to me is to provide me with a functional search tool - therefore i am a client.The ODP is a directory. Directories are meant to be browsed. If you want a search engine, there are loads of those around.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 AOL is fully aware of any issues and suggestions surrounding the search tool on dmoz.org so there is no need to escalate anything. I would like to report this issue - who can i report it to?
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 *sigh* It was a general comment. Thanks for your suggestions for improving the search tool. Consider them all taken on board but this discussion has really run to conclusion. The ODP is a directory. Directories are meant to be browsed. If you want a search engine, there are loads of those around. It may have run to your conclusion - but not to mine! All the replies have taken no positive action to improve the service DMOZ offera to the public - and I think that is appauling.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 It may have run to your conclusion - but not to mine! All the replies have taken no positive action to improve the service DMOZ offera to the public - and I think that is appauling. You've really missed the point and you have not addressed the original posting.
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 I would like to report this issue - who can i report it to?As with anything else related to the ODP, you are more than welcome to contact staff@dmoz.org .
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 As with anything else related to the ODP, you are more than welcome to contact staff@dmoz.org . Thanks. I appreciate it. I've just found this in DMOZ FAQ's - "Because of these factors, it is certainly not a reliable means of finding out whether a particular site is listed in the ODP or not." - So let me ask the question - what the hell is the point of it and why then instruct people to use the search tool to find a site if the thing does not work? Surely, its a simple fix implemented in a shorter time frame than it is to discuss it. I am amazed no one is taking responsibility for this - its a disgrace to the whole project!
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 I've just found this in DMOZ FAQ's - "Because of these factors, it is certainly not a reliable means of finding out whether a particular site is listed in the ODP or not." - So let me ask the question - what the hell is the point of it and why then instruct people to use the search tool to find a site if the thing does not work? It does work, just not quite the way you are expecting it to. Searching on the domain name without the www will turn up reliable results, again keeping in mind that the search is based on the weekly RDF dump. Surely, its a simple fix implemented in a shorter time frame than it is to discuss it.That's not our call to make -- we're just volunteer editors. I'm really not sure why you're getting so worked up over this. You've found something you think is wrong with someone else's site. You've reported it. Move on. Is it really worth getting so upset over?
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 The point is that the search, such as it is, works the way it was intended. Whether that's a good thing or not is a whole different matter. Well, actually, this forum isn't like most forums. It's more a venue for editors to answer questions than it is a venue for debate. The problem is that you're looking for a different answer to a question that isn't open-ended. And discussion about how the search should work probably isn't going to be particularly helpful since the editors who post here don't have anything to do with the functioning of the search itself. I'm sorry Motsa - but i disagree with what you say about the forum. It's a public forum for the project. I appreciate that most of the people who use it are editors - but the purpose and intent is for everyone - otherwise why would people be allowed to register? thank you for at least pointing me in the right direction.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 I'm sorry Motsa - but i disagree with what you say about the forum. It's a public forum for the project. I appreciate that most of the people who use it are editors - but the purpose and intent is for everyone - otherwise why would people be allowed to register? thank you for at least pointing me in the right direction. Thanks for your constructive feedback. Hey - I agree with you - In the big scheme of life it's of no consequence at all whether DMOZ chooses to improve its service; However, as people dedicated to the project, I would have assumed that your passion and interest would drive the changes to improve the service rather than ignoring the issue and not doing something constructive to resolve it whether it's in your remit or not.
motsa Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 However, as people dedicated to the project, I would have assumed that your passion and interest would drive the changes to improve the service rather than ignoring the issue and not doing something constructive to resolve it whether it's in your remit or not. It's a peripheral function of the directory at best -- as a user, I've never used the search function on a directory site (directories are meant to be browsed), and I only use it on dmoz.org in my capacity as an editor -- it always works fine for me so for me personally, there is no issue with the ODP search. Changing the search functionality ranks very low on my personal list of improvements I'd like to see. Where it sits in AOL's list of improvements they want to make, I couldn't say.
interestedguy Posted June 11, 2008 Author Posted June 11, 2008 It's a peripheral function of the directory at best -- as a user, I've never used the search function on a directory site (directories are meant to be browsed), and I only use it on dmoz.org in my capacity as an editor -- it always works fine for me so for me personally, there is no issue with the ODP search. Changing the search functionality ranks very low on my personal list of improvements I'd like to see. Where it sits in AOL's list of improvements they want to make, I couldn't say. Whatever your perspective may be, it's ironic that the final words of the submission guidelines reads... The Open Directory team welcomes comments and feedback about the directory generally. Please let us know what you think, and how we can improve the service. Thanks! - but it does not say how or who to feedback to and it becomes laughable that the DMOZ forums own search utility is far more advanced (and it works!) than that of the project itself! I've made my suggestions, I hope someone, somewhere, has the grace and initiative to act upon it for the common good of all "clients" out there.
Recommended Posts