DMOZ assistance

[DarrenC]

I know I should be asking this in the resource zone but I was hoping that a DMOZ editor who is a member here could help me with an issue that I have.

My domain holiday-rentals.uk.com is currently listed in DMOZ under the regional category for the town where the business is based - but the category I feel the site should be listed under is travel > lodging > vacation rentals > directory.

I asked why the site was not in this category, and I was told that DMOZ were not submitting new sites to this category due to a large number of spam submissions AND that they thought the site didn't cover enough properties or destinations.

At the time I was too busy to argue the case, and was happy that I am atleast in the directory, be it a category that no one is going to find me on.

Since then I have looked at this category, and a number of new sites have been added, which is great, but these sites, I feel are nothing like directories, one in particular had one property in Spain - to me that is not going to be useful to searchers.

Can anyone suggest what I should do to try and resolve this issue - I want to be in a category where people will find me - my submission was nothing to do with SEO of my site, but to drive traffic from DMOZ, which at the moment it is not doing.

Any thoughts? Should I just give up? :D

Darren

[l234244]

I would give up, even if you got moved I would not expect the traffic to flood in. In 7 months I have had 5 visitors from dmoz.

[DarrenC]

I'm not expecting floods of traffic - I suppose another reason why I would love to be listed in this category, is that industry experts refer to this list of websites in articles and such things.

Yes, they could use Google, but many use DMOZ for research (myself included)

[Solicitors Mortgages]

i agree with 122323342233422443234322121

you should consider yourself fortunate to make it in...and not be on a 5 year waiting list (i am sure you do)
there are lots of sites that import dmoz pages...so hopefullly you will get some extra refferals, complaining to dmoz or asking to be moved could just cause more problems...although i hope it works out for you.

[Michael]

It is not clear if you have submitted to travel/lodging/vacation_rentals/directory previously and it was declined?

- Michael

[DarrenC]

gem, cheers :)

michael, yes I submitted it to that category and it got rejected - an editor in the resource forum suggested my local regional area, which was accepted. The reason for rejection IMO is poor, considering the inconsistancy of the websites in there.

I'm not slagging off DMOZ, and I'm happy that its in the directory, but I am looking at this from a searchers point of view that if you used the category system to search and research you'd not find my website in its correct category IMO lol

[minstrel]

Don't look at it from a searcher's point of view, wwhhomes. Who uses DMOZ for searching? Who uses DMOZ for anything except the backlink value? And for that, being listed in Toys | Children | Girls | Barbie Accessories would be just as valuable.

I really wouldn't worry about it. Spend that time building up other backlinks, including by submitting to other free directories.

[whateverusay]

I would personally avoid any dialogue as it should not even be listed where it is as it does not contain anything of local use. If you scream loud enough they will realise and you will see it vanish.

Shhhhhhhhhhh

[DarrenC]

whateverusay, lol thanks for the advice

minstrel, ofcourse your right, but it annoys me when I see the type of sites in there, but my efforts are best optimising the site.

[macdesign]

it should not even be listed where it is as it does not contain anything of local use
Sure it should be listed there - the company is located there

[Blogmaster]

So if I created a web site about the best places to see in Australia, people would have to go to Local San Diego Businesses to be able to find it?

[Sirxl]

you could try to join as a DMOZ editor ?

[minstrel]

wwhhomes - if you are looking for answers from DMOZ, you should know by now you won't get any, or at least none of any value. If you are looking for logic from DMOZ editors, the chances of finding even that are slim. Usually, the most you can hope for is arrogant condescension and defensiveness.

[anthonycea]

They will all be fired soon and replaced with automation Minstrel, why worry about it, change is coming to DMOZ soon!!!!!! :eek:

[minstrel]

I doubt it but I'd like to think you're right and I'd applaud it if it happened.

[anthonycea]

Sure it has to happen, with the public relations disaster they have going on right now and most of the community pissed off at the process they will be forced to make change.

It is a big joke that folks do not even have status of if their communication (submission) has been received or not.

The entire system is a joke and the human editing process is lackluster and subject to favoritism.

Who has the majority of free listings in the directory :confused: AOL themselves :p :p

No wonder Google will drop them soon, because AOL is going to invest to compete against Google using the DMOZ database themselves one day.

[macdesign]

The question originally asked was but I was hoping that a DMOZ editor who is a member here could help me with an issue that I have

Unfortunately this forum is turning more and more into a DMOZ bashing empire like several other SEO forums, and masochistic though I am, I see it's a waste of time posting - to be continually attacked by the same faces I see on the other forums.

So, wwhhomes I leave you in their capable hands.

[minstrel]

My domain holiday-rentals.uk.com is currently listed in DMOZ under the regional category for the town where the business is based - but the category I feel the site should be listed under is travel > lodging > vacation rentals > directory.

I asked why the site was not in this category, and I was told that DMOZ were not submitting new sites to this category due to a large number of spam submissions AND that they thought the site didn't cover enough properties or destinations.
it should not even be listed where it is as it does not contain anything of local use
Sure it should be listed there - the company is located there
<snip>
The question originally asked was but I was hoping that a DMOZ editor who is a member here could help me with an issue that I have. Unfortunately this forum is turning more and more into a DMOZ bashing empire like several other SEO forums, and masochistic though I am, I see it's a waste of time posting - to be continually attacked by the same faces I see on the other forums.
Your response illustrates precisely why so many people are so frustrated and enraged by DMOZ and DMOZ editors. Evidently, you think your response earlier was helpful -- let me enlighten you a bit on that, macdesign: it was not at all helpful -- it was no more helpful than the original reply wwhhomes received at DMOZ. It was a typical DMOZ response which basically says, "we did it because we felt like it and we won't even consider changing our minds and you have no right to even ask the question and you should be grateful we listed you at all and even bothered to reply to your question".

That's why you see so many people on so many forums (pretty much anyone and everyone on ANY forum who isn't a DMOZ editor, actually) "bashing DMOZ" as the DMOZ gang likes to describe any questions asked about how DMOZ does its thing.

[anthonycea]

Who is attacking you? Minstrel and I hardly agree on anything, but since we have the same position on DMOZ all of a sudden the entire forum is now DMOZ BASHING!!! That is pure BS, because other members have had good things to say right here on DP.

Maybe you feel a threat to your business of DMOZ related sites, but no one is attacking you personally, if the truth hurts that much then you should not post your side of the story. We are all willing to hear it if you would post your side of the story, if your views are not worth fighting for then what are they worth :confused:

MACDesign has a service for sale that DMOZ should provide for free.

http://www.open-directory-status.com/

So we see why he is so mad when I say that all editors should be fired and the entire directory automated.

AOL Sucks in about everything they do and DMOZ is no exception to this rule.

[whateverusay]

MACDesign you should know better than to say that just because a company is based in an area it is automatically listed there without question.

The site does not contain anything of use locally and does not qualify for a locality listing. If the address was a 'walk in' office also offering services to the locale then that would be diferent but as the service is a web based one only it has no use being listed in tinytown just like the online only webshop.

[Blogmaster]

and masochistic though I am,
No, you are plain stupid!
I'll compare DMOZ to Denny's right now and you to the toothless waitress working in the small town Georgia Denny's who cannot figgure out how to process a traveller's check. You are not even on the level to communicate with intelligent people here. That is why all your sig links are DMOZ related because you have nothing else going for yourself like so many DMOZ editors. Go back to resource zone where morons are being accepted based on their position rather than skills. There are lots of DMOZ guys here 8 of which are my friends. They would not want to be caught dead associating themselves with someone like you. The reason the others won't is because the bad ones are cowards who only show up where one of their kind moderates or someone protects them. Just like your lowlife friend Hutchenson who bans ppl and talks bad to them after they are banned and can no longer respond.

Anyways, please step aside and stop spewing false information. There are newbies reading this and this place is too informative to become polluted by idiots who think they are important because someone backs them up.

To everyone else at DP, I apologize my words but it needs to be said, let's be of help to everyone and not lower ourselves onto their levels any longer.

Peace,


Mike

[Blogmaster]

btw I am NOT bashing DMOZ and good editors like this: http://dmoz.org/profiles/oneeye.html
After Mac's display that would be offensive to throw them all into the same pile.
I am bashing idiots with nothing to say who say things anyways.
As well as those who overlook it, back it up and do nothing about it.

[joeychgo]

The question originally asked was but I was hoping that a DMOZ editor who is a member here could help me with an issue that I have

Unfortunately this forum is turning more and more into a DMOZ bashing empire like several other SEO forums, and masochistic though I am, I see it's a waste of time posting - to be continually attacked by the same faces I see on the other forums.

So, wwhhomes I leave you in their capable hands.



Kinda feels like the resouce-zone - but in reverse. All the way around. Several people ganging up on one, that one being made to look and feel like the bad guy, regardless whether he is or not.

The only difference is that these people commenting here are some very good people who only want to express their frustration at being belittled by some at DMOZ. Not all, but some. There are some good dmoz editors...I can attest to that. But unfortunately the demigods that tend to fill the resouce zone with their undeserved arrogance and demeaning presence tend to overshadow the good dmoz editors who really try and do a good job.

I thank and applaud those good editors and only ask that they keep trying and keep swimming upstream against the tide of arrogance and mediocrity that they must to survive.

I'm sure im looking at a ton of bad rep for this, but who cares. Its how I feel.

Oh, and I agree, Oneeye is one of the good editors.

[anthonycea]

If MacDesign would have just posted what he was going to post instead of getting upset at the comments in the thread we could have progressed.

But his comments brought out other points that folks needed to make anyway.

I just don't think these guys (editors) want anything to change, so when I say that they should all be fired and replaced with automation they get pissed off.

If the editors make their living off of something that is supposed to be open and free I can understand why they get mad when someone suggests that they should all be fired from their "volunteer" positions.

Fact remains that I submitted my site two or three times and never even heard from a soul, when I went on their forum and asked why they said to give them the exact URL of the page that I submitted to or they could not even give me an answer.

They said to submit it again and not to ask about it for six months or something along those lines, just a bunch of BullShit for something that is supposed to be so important to a webmaster.

[joeychgo]

Actually - I cant figure out what the purpose of the resouce zone is. Does anyone get any real answers there?

[anthonycea]

They guide folks just like the Bush Administration does, in a way that you really don't want to go :p :p

[joeychgo]

it just seems like most questions are answered either with NO or Check back in 6 months.

[anthonycea]

Don't worry Joey, SiteTutor is going to get this thing solved for the community :p :p :eek:

[joeychgo]

ROFL --- Unfortunately, I'll lay even money that it wont ever get fixed. Google will tire of the BS and go another way, and that will be the end of dmoz.

[anthonycea]

Joey, ST says the same thing, but it is just a database on a server, it ain't going no where :o

AOL will use it as the base of their Search Engine, they are investing heavy in search and local search, so it will be around.

The question is how the database will be built and maintained in the FUTURE, not what is has been.

[joeychgo]

I dont know - AOL tends to completely redo things instead of improving whats already there - I say this as an aol beta tester for 8 years

[anthonycea]

To redo this would be to fire the editors and replace them with a voting system by the users of the directory as to which sites are the best.

If a site gets voted down so far it could be dropped out, if the pages are dead they could be automatically dropped also.

Webmasters could also submit sites automatically just like other directories have automatic submission and those sites could be voted up or down by users.

Automation could make the database fair and clean and user friendly.

[DarrenC]

Whoa! I didnt start this thread in the hope that it would become a DMOZ bashing exercise!

Macdesign, firstly thanks for taking the time our to reply to my questions.

Yes, my business is based in Pudsey, UK, which is where my website is listed in DMOZ, if someone is looking for a property in Spain, they are not going to go to my regional town page to find a website.

Realistically, this means my website will never be found by holidaymakers, and in my opinion defeats what DMOZ is all about. I can understand editors getting miffed by SPAM, and this causing a delay, but to be rejected because the website doesn't cover enough countries or properties is not reasonable when websites have been accepted in this category which cover a few countries, and a small number of properties (our site covers 45 countries and over 1,500 properties)

I know I'm not going to get anywhere with this, but I think common sense needs to prevail when websites are submitted to a regional / town page, knowing that the website offers a service or product to people worldwide.

Thanks for everyones comments and thoughts.

Darren :)

[Michael]

Actually - I cant figure out what the purpose of the resouce zone is. Does anyone get any real answers there? (added) it just seems like most questions are answered either with NO or Check back in 6 months. The starter of this thread got some answers - judge for yourself if they are real or not :)

http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10747

http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20135

http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6489

http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24218

- Michael

[minstrel]

Do you consider those to be answers? I don't.

The "answer" by Hutcheson in your first link is Start by reading the category description. Vacation rental sites should be submitted TO THE LOCALITY CONTAINING THE VACATION RENTAL. which contradicts what wwhhomes was told and what happened. If that's an answer, all it tells us is that the policies aren't consistent.

In the 2nd link, all we see is "that question has been answere elsewhere".

In the 3rd link, a series of status queries are answered with "nothing has happened -- no one has looked at it yet".

And in the 4th link, we see the usual DMOZ stonewalling -- no answers, just "you have no right to ask or comment".

[joeychgo]

Unfortunately, thats why I think the Resource-zone is a waste of internet.

[Michael]

Do you consider those to be answers?Sure they are answers. They may not be the ones you want to see, they may even be wrong answers but answers they surely are.

Personally like joeychgo I think the resource zone is a waste of time.

- Michael

[minstrel]

They're not answers at all -- they are non-answers -- they don't clarify anything.

[joeychgo]

thats the point. They dont want anything clarified, cause then you could come back and say "what about when you said this?"

Then they would be forced into answering questions. Cant have that.

[minstrel]

Which is what happened when Hutcheson answered wwhhomes -- he contradicted what another editor had said -- no wonder they prefer to stonewall.

[anthonycea]

What would Donald Trump do :confused: :p :p :p

[DarrenC]

Michael, thanks for taking the time to link to the threads in question. I wouldn't be making a post on the forum, asking questions if my questions were answered, believe me I have much better things to do with my time!

My questions remain unanswered - but I have work to do and money to make, but thanks for your response.

Darren

[Blogmaster]

To be honest with you, Darren, at this point and time you will not get any good answers and assistance unless you form a "personal relationship" with one of the editors.

[anthonycea]

Now wait a minute TOOT, you told us you had 6 friends that were editors, yet at the same time you seem to be publishing pages on DMOZ :confused:

Can you explain this? Please explain the pages and what you are trying to do by publishing these pages. Did they reject you as an editor at one time and now you are out to get them?

Are you making money off of these DMOZ informational pages that you have published :confused:

[joeychgo]

Oh geeze - here we go

[Blogmaster]

It is not about me, Anthony. For example, if you go to the website reviews section, someone asked about opinions, would you as an seo give false advice and then label yourself as an expert, or not even look at the site, make a comment like "your title tags are too spammy" just to lateron find out they don't even have title tags?

[anthonycea]

Where we goin Joey :confused: :p :o

The forum wants to know TOOT's motivation to keep this story straight :confused:

[Blogmaster]

Like I said, it's not about me or individual sites, it's about the overall quality of search results and how it is being tainted thru idiots in the wrong positions, just like spammers taint search results in msn and make things harder for quality web sites to come up first!

[anthonycea]

Wait a moment ST, you are now an editor of Joe Ant a competitive directory, so this thing is getting interesting, will you explain a bit about this to the forum :confused: :)

[Solicitors Mortgages]

Like I said, it's not about me or individual sites, it's about the overall quality of search results and how it is being tainted thru idiots in the wrong positions, just like spammers taint search results in msn and make things harder for quality web sites to come up first!


i am on your wave length with that bro,

...i hate spammy sites...and i hate the fact that dmoz incudes them.
http://www.searchguild.com/tpage19021-0.html

[anthonycea]

Oh, it is always good to hear from my great friends at Search Guild, Eddie is an old friend of mine and so is Birdie :p :D :p

[Blogmaster]

I have been a JoeAnt editor for 2 years and I like JoeAnt a lot! I have learned to look outside of the box and see what kind of sites are useful, even if they are not useful to me - I am learning to see what kind of web sites are useful to some people and which ones are simple self serving. I don't spend a ton of time there but I do take it very serious. Directories are supposed to enhance overall search results and not pollute them like DMOZ is doing.

[anthonycea]

So the DMOZ editors can now use this against you claiming that your opinion is bias because you are an editor for Joe Ant, could they not TOOT :confused: :)

[Blogmaster]

not at all, joeAnt is about 0.002% percent of all posts I have ever made. joe Ant is a cool thing to do on the side, they don't need me, they are doing good.

[anthonycea]

Maybe you are not getting the idea here ST.

If I was a critic of Google but worked for Yahoo, I could not be considered an objective commentator on Google issues.

What would you think if the Republican party controlled the news you watch on TV :confused:

Oh, sorry TOOT, bad example (Fox News) :p :p

[Blogmaster]

I believe in JoeAnt, Anthony. Even though their influence on the SERP's are miniscule compared to DMOZ.

[anthonycea]

OK Toot, but don't be surprised if DMOZ starts attacking you as a critic that is working for the competition, they are not stupid you know :cool:

[Blogmaster]

DMOZ is infested with corrupt spammers, JoeAnt is not, enough said!
Joe Ant Directory (http://www.joeant.com) is built upon principles and never lost them :)
But this is not about them ... you brought it up for whatever reason.

[anthonycea]

I gota hit the sack Toot, but make sure you leave the lights on when you go to bed, the DMOZ monster is out to get you man, be sure of that :eek: :p :p :p

[Blogmaster]

JoeAnt is the best directory on earth, the editors there are superb. I am NOT one of the main ones but the ones I work with have established themselves elsewhere as well.
I have been an seo for 5 yrs and when spammers like searchking.com went down, I moved up. I hate spammers. DMOZ is the #1 spammer now. I am behind JoeAnt but that is just me. This is not about me and my opinions, just about people keeping a sinking ship afloat because of the name.


DMOZ is done, JoeAnt is not, whether they will become bigger or not.

I stand behind what I believe in, and my instinct has NEVER failed me. Whose side are you on anyways, Anthony? It is not about me or JoeAnt ...

[joeychgo]

Oh geeze - here we go

Page and a half later - still going. http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/images/smilies/pat.gif

[anthonycea]

For me it never has anything to do with taking sides, on a forum members have to be objective, if I say that DMOZ should fire all the editors and use automation and a user voting system to move sites up or down/out of the directory I mean it.

That is "good" for the community and DMOZ, all I am looking for is a better way for webmasters.

If M$ changed tomorrow for the better, I would be happy with them, at this time I am not happy with either DMOZ or M$ so I simply state an opinion on forums and they are objective because I have no conflict of interest.

What I am saying ST, is that folks will use your association with JA against you when considering your opinion on DMOZ, it is as simple as that.

[minstrel]

on a forum members have to be objective, if I say that DMOZ should fire all the editors and use automation and a user voting system to move sites up or down/out of the directory I mean it... I simply state an opinion on forums and they are objective because I have no conflict of interest.
No. Your opinions are subjective regardless of your intent in stating those opinions. They are subjective because they are based on opinion rather than on objective data. Whether or not you have a conflict of interest has nothing to do with whether the statement is objective or subjective.

As for DMOZ claiming sitetutor isn't objective because he is associated with JoeAnt, it wouldn't surprise me if DOMZ editors tried to use that as another red-herring-smokescreen, but so what? They already apparently believe that all webmasters are subjective scammers and spammers, if you accept the Resourceless Zone posts as representative...

[anthonycea]

Henry Kissinger had to resign from the 9/11 commission because of a conflict of interest, Kissinger & Associates represents the Saudi government in Washington, he did that because he could not be objective, he had a conflict of interest because of an association, he could not be a proper judge of the matter because he represents that government.

I am not saying ST's opinions are not worthwhile on this subject, but that his association with JoeAnt may make him a target of DMOZ propaganda.

[minstrel]

Being alive, moderately intelligent, and a webmaster -- or indeed simply one who is disinclined to worship at the altar of the Resourceless Zone -- "may make [one] a target of DMOZ propaganda".

[anthonycea]

Yes but how can one "hate" a directory :confused:

DMOZ is an important part of the internet and has been from the very start, it is not going away.

What folks should focus on is how can they change the submission process and the administration of the directory, PERIOD.

DMOZ is a product, not the devil :eek:

[minstrel]

What folks should focus on is how can they change the submission process and the administration of the directory, PERIOD.
You just don't get it, AC. You can't change anything about DMOZ because the muddy-headed little ingroup that runs it likes it the way it is -- they are not about to willingly relinquish power and I don't see AOL or anyone else with sufficient interest or stones to turf the bastards out and start over.

[anthonycea]

AOL is a major technology company that is making a big push into the search industry, including local search.

They could simply fire all the editors and replace them with automation and I do expect them to do so soon. :eek:

[minstrel]

As I said before, AC -- AOL has owned the Netscape group since like 1997 or 1999 or so... they've not done anything to initiate changes in DMOZ in the past 6-8 years so don't hold your breath.

[anthonycea]

It is the internet's # 1 directory database Minstrel, a fantastic product that they can turn into a giant profit center when integrated into the future AOL search product.

So if Google or others discount it, AOL will enhance their exclusive use of it, really it is just a matter of time for major changes to occur.

[minstrel]

You have more faith in AOL than I do.

If it takes them 6-8 years to clean house, what makes you think they'll add new pages to DMOZ any more efficiently than the current mob?

And really... have you ever SEEN what the AOL browser does to a PC?

[anthonycea]

A bit of data about AOL search and DMOZ is in the following links.

http://battellemedia.com/archives/001199.php

http://www.searchengineblog.com/rich-skrenta-interview.htm

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[minstrel]

The interesting part is that Skrenta says here what I've been saying for some time -- that DMOZ is doomed to collapse under it's own weight and misguided aims, even without slapstick efforts of the Resourceless Zone to speed the process along:

I'd like to talk a little more about your background, particularly in relation to DMOZ. An article published in 1998 stated that you created GnuHoo out of frustration with Yahoo!, in particular, the slowness at which the Yahoo! directory added and updated sites back then. Can you tell us a bit about those times? How do you think DMOZ has progressed since you left to pursue other ventures?

Dmoz has continued to grow since we left AOL. The open directory project vastly exceeded our original goals -- we thought if we could get 1,000 editors and 1 million sites, the direction would be a huge success. It achieved these goals and has fulfilled its mission of becoming the largest human-edited directory of the web. But the web moved on, and while directories were very interesting in the mid '90's, keyword search has eclipsed them as the main ways consumers find information on the Internet.

[anthonycea]

I have said the same thing, "who uses a directory to find anything" :eek:

But the fact remains that any database can be used as part of a search engines foundation, so AOL could find a way to automate the directory as I have mentioned and incorporate it into AOL Search.

It is the only smart thing to do if as the founder mentions that it is slow and in danger of failing.

[minstrel]

Anthony, do you realize you just used the terms "AOL" and "smart" and, by implication, "DMOZ" in the same post?

What were you thinking, man? :eek:

[anthonycea]

I think they will use it in conjunction with MapQuest as a local search tool, local search is to boom and maybe that is why they want guys like WW to be in their local slots.

http://www.mapquest.com/about/main.adp

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Collusion]

Wow, long thread. I personally have started many DMOZ threads and I consider myself a professional on the matter. DMOZ will never change until the only change that happens is a massive collapse. OR I will buy DMOZ and fire everyone and start fresh. Until one of those things happen just boycott them. Sounds like a valid plan to make a change doesn't it? We all claim to hate DMOZ and the ways that they show their ignorance yet we keep submitting our sites to them. I am going to make the first step and DEMAND that they take any sites I have listed in their off. And any sites I have in the future that they find and decide to list I will have them remove it. If everyone does this then what happens is they no longer have any sites in their directory. They become more useless than they are now. Quit going after SiteTutor. He is right and that's that!

[accountability]

There is nothing you can do to get sites removed from DMOZ. They will list whatever sites they want when they want.

Maybe two things you can do, take the site down, or make it redirect.

You guys sure spent a lot of energy on DMOZ - do you ever do any work?

[minstrel]

You guys sure spent a lot of energy on DMOZ - do you ever do any work?
You think that's not work? :eek:

[rob777]

Hi All,

I must say first off I am an editor at Dmoz.

I want to comment on a few things that were brought up in this extremely long thread.


"Dmoz editors are corrupt and lazy” - Not necessarily true. The majority of editors are website owners, and a result of that is some apply, get approved, edit a couple of sites, add their own site(s) and disappear. This is abuse and when found (most always) it is dealt with by the people that specialize in dealing with the abuse cases. I have found a couple new editors that seemed to be abusing the system and reported them. But there are other editors like myself that are legit and do this for fun and take the directory seriously.

I submitted my first website and waited for 8 months and still no listing. After checking the directory about every week to see if it was listed yet, I decided to apply as an editor (in a category with a topic I found interesting, totally unrelated to where I submitted my website to). I liked editing because I got to see many sites I would not have ever found just surfing the net and I felt like I was helping accomplish something--building a bigger better directory.

Fast-forward to today...I have a few thousand edits, a few dozen small sub categories created, and have worked my way up and gained permissions to edit in many other categories. Here is the part you probably won't believe. I am now the editor of the category I originally submitted my website to. I submitted my website 2 years ago, and it is still sitting in the list of unreviewed with 1,130 other sites. And it will stay there until I get through the list and its turn comes. Then I will NOT edit it myself, I will ask for assistance from another editor higher up the experience ladder. Guidelines say you can edit your own sites as long as NO special treatment or preference is given to it. I do not want to be anywhere near a situation where someone might accuse me of wrong doing.

Now, I would like to think there are other editors that feel the way, and I'm sure there are some, but many editors do just join, add their site and leave. I think when it is discovered, the site is removed do to abuse. But I cannot say for sure, as for security reasons, abuse investigations are not disclosed to any editors or public.

As far as the being "LAZY” - That is not really true either.
It is a volunteer service as you know. And most of us editors cannot sit and edit for 8 hours every day. I, as do most, come in for a couple hours a week if we can swing it. Sometimes I might spend a few hours editing go to bed and do a few more hours the next day. It all depends on what is going on in our real lives. I now have 3 websites to manage, a wife, a 2 yr old son, twin boys due in another month, and hopefully will be working to fulltime jobs as a home inspector, and a real estate agent. Then I have my hobbies a woodshop and animals to take care of. If can only edit a few sites a week for the time being, I refuse to be called LAZY. Many other editors are in similar situations, they work jobs, have families, hobbies, and probably their own websites to take care of. The editing at Dmoz is a volunteer thing that we do help contribute to something we feel is great.

"And if you think editing a site is just a click of a button, so why can't they keep up?" It takes time to review each site. Here's how it works (or is supposed to work) we go to the site, look through it, make sure it can be navigated, is all there and not in construction, make sure the url is not cloaked or redirected, make sure the content is there and good, Sometimes we get a dejavue feeling and have to go back to the directory and make sure it's not a mirror of a site already in the directory. Then if everything is good, we make sure it fits the category, if not, we have to search out the directory and find the right category to send it to. If it comes to another category that we don't have permissions in, it is automatically placed in the waiting for review list. Here it waits wit the others until the editor there come to it and repeats the review process. Then we have to make sure the title is the company name or website title (which ever is appropriate for that site) and not a slogan or keyword list (many webmasters for some reason can't read the submission guideline in front of them and they put a 10-50 keywords in the title box). Then time for the description, if the submitter did it as instructed in the guidelines, I can just read it, ok it, and click "ADD" to the directory. If they didn't bother to follow directions, we have to come up with our own summary of the website and rewrite the description (which after a 100's of websites, it gets hard to think of new ways to describe similar sites).

A good quality site that loads fast and a properly fill out submission form can be edited and added in about 2-3 minutes. The slow loading, hard to navigate, spammy looking sites with a totally inappropriate submission form, can take 10+ minutes edit and add (if it is found to have enough useful unique content to be added to the directory)

Now take into consideration a category that is a spam magnet like for example "Computers/anything here” There is a list of 8,000-12,000 or more sites waiting for review. Most of which belong in a sub-category down the tree, and the multiple submissions of the same site, and deeplinks to every page on those sites, and the fact that there are many other categories in the same way. It takes along time to go through that many sites when you can only edit 10-20 sites per hour and the editors have many different categories to tend to.

That is not "LAZY". That is being overrun by whinny webmasters that think the guidelines are not meant for them, that think they should be listed in a bunch of categories, that think every article they have on their website should be listed in the directory, that think just because their site wasn't listed in less than a week that the editor is corrupt and lazy. If people submitted to Dmoz as instructed on the submission form, and stopped trying be sneaky (like the old ways of search engine tricks) the work load of sites to review would be at minimum (in my opinion) 1/3 of what it is currently. That means sites would be reviewed and possibly listed within 2-3 weeks instead 3 years (yes 3 yrs, I have come across sites submitted in 2001 and tried to edit them but you guessed it...they were dead).



Now as far as the "inconsistencies of the different editors, sites listed, and categories" - Yes you’re right. You will have that with human interaction. We all have the same guidelines covering the whole directory, and then there are some category specific details that we have to deal with. And every editor will understand the guidelines to mean something slightly different than other editors.

Example- guidelines say that the site must not be under construction. Some editors will take this to the word and will deny a site that has 4 sections with articles and content and 2 sections that have the stupid construction .gif page. Where as another editor my think that the 4 sections have enough quality content to make it a useful addition to a category.

And category specific details are sometimes hard to view the same as everyone else. Everything is based on the editor’s best judgment.

Example- Pets/dogs/breeds/husky guidelines say "only sites about huskies” But general Dmoz guidelines say a site should be placed in a category specific to the majority of content, based on an editor’s best judgment.
A site is submitted to Pets/dogs/breeds and it is 70% about huskies, and the rest is about Hounds. Some editors would put that site in Husky category (because it has the largest and most active husky forum, others might put it in pets/dogs/breeds, and some might put it in Pets/dogs/breeds/Hounds, and some might put it in pets/dogs/forums. That site is a good candidate for most of those options but we can only list it once (in super rare instances, 2 topical listings). It all depends on the editor's judgment. Later on that editor might quit or give up the category to move one to others, then a different editor moves into this one and has a different idea of what the guidelines say, so they move this site to a different category thinking it is a better fit there.

The whole point of the directory is to categorize the sites to topics for easy navigation by users. But when you start getting specific in the topic it becomes hard to fit most sites. Not many sites are as specific to only cover one topic like science/environment/toxicwaste/landfill/products and services/software because the site probably sells software for many industries but specializes in toxic waste landfill. You can group them with others in software because you would have a list of about 5,000 sites that users would have read through. The specificness of the directory's categories are what make it easy to find specific sites, but it is also the cause of inconsistencies because you have that gray area of "where would this site fit better".

[rob777]

- Continued -



It's hard, but I don't this computer automation would change this.

Which brings me to my next point, “Dmoz will be better when/if AOL fires them all and automates this” - Impossible (in my opinion) how would sites be automatically placed to proper categories? Would this be determined by where the submitter indicates his site should be listed? This would be a spam directory.
How would the descriptions be filled in? By the submitter filling in the blank on the form? By AOL pulling a meta-description from the site? This would result in a list of hyped descriptions (potentially and probably) not telling what the site is really about. Dmoz would turn into a free for all link farm if automated.

What if AOL hired a staff of editors? How much would AOL charge for inclusion, to cover the cost of paying the editors? How would this set AOL apart from Yahoo? It wouldn't, they would become a mirror of Yahoo.

What if AOL took it over for the huge database of sites? It already has the sites from crawling. Why would AOL need to step in and reorganize the directory if they are using new ground breaking search capabilities? Shouldn't they just keep sending their bot or spider over to Dmoz and harvest new sites every couple days, and not worry about the headache of having to manage another entity. They can just sit back let the editors keep finding new sites for their bots to pick up easily and crawl finding more sites from those new sites. If they want to be a power house in the search engine war, I would think they are gonna worry more about algorithms and improving search results, than making sure a site is listed in a more appropriate category of a directory.

The Human factor in Dmoz, is what sets it apart from most others.

"Who uses directories?" - I do. When I am looking for good information I use Dmoz. When I am first looking for basics on a topic I use Google search (which I find a few good sites but mostly not quite what I'm looking for.) When someone emails me on my website looking for information on something, I always point them to a category or two at Dmoz, 90% of them have emailed me back and thanked me.


"Dmoz needs to collapse or all editors fired and start fresh to fix the problem” - If your fire all the editors and start fresh with new human editors, you will have the same problems. Webmasters make up the majority of the editors and many of them are only out to take advantage of the system and serve themselves. So if you think having all new editors with change anything, think again. You will still have people listing their own sites and deleting the competitor's, still have people that won't add bad sites and then they won't tell you why. Nothing will change.

If you say collapse as meaning the administrative make up of Dmoz. That won't matter either. There are only like 3 or 4 paid people at Dmoz and they are mainly there to keep servers maintained and running right, they don't usually edit, they do review editors, and decide which ones deserve to be granted Meta permissions. And there are I think 7 long time editors that have been named administrators (non-paid), but that happened within the last year, and they are now mainly managing the operations like watching editors, investigating, tool development, and public relations. I don't see how getting rid of these people would do anything more than cause Dmoz to continue in a worse abuse state as no one would be monitoring everyone and everything.

The "voting system for sites and additions” - Do you really think that would make the directory cleaner? Let’s see...1,000,000 submissions to vote on every week, how many votes would be needed to get added? How would people see the sites to vote on inclusion, all sites submitted would have to be listed, which mean the directory would show 10 one page spam sites or redirects to listed sites, for every 1 quality useful site. The sites that didn't get votes would be dropped? How long would they have to get votes before they disappear? A site describing in detail how to resole a pair of shoes to save money, would probably not get enough votes to stay listed in a directory filled with "get vi@gra now" spam sites that the submitted keeps voting for. Or the webmasters that create and use bots to keep voting for their site to stay listed as popular. This system would be abused even worse than the original version.


"The stonewall, typical non-answer received from dmoz editors” - I have read many answers given by editors to the webmasters and maybe it's because I am an editor, but I can see and understand the answers. They are basically stating what is covered in the guidelines of the Dmoz. We as editors have read them many times to get a solid understanding of them and they pretty much make sense to most of us. Maybe that is why the answers given are not understood as an answer and people call them a run a round or stonewall answer? That would explain the ignorant submissions we receive everyday, if the webmasters can't comprehend the guidelines, I guess they would be able to understand an answer based on those same guidelines.

The resource zone was a good idea. But I think it may be overwhelming to the editors now. There are way too many people with complaints, questions, and submission update requests for the editors to answer everyone and not get annoyed and upset from answering the same questions over and over. That is why I stay away from there. I edit my categories and try to stay out of the RZ.

Put yourself in these shoes. You are the editor of shopping/online/gifts. The category has 500 listings already from previous editors that seemed to like to add every site that was submitted. You have 1,200 sites in the list of unreviewed that you start working on. The first site you edit is Mygreatgifts.com is a cookie cutter OsCommerce cart site selling SMC drop shipped gifts. Everything looks ok so you add it. The next site is 241greatgifts.com Site is the same Os cart site with a different colored header and logo, same layout, same SMC drop shipped gifts. You look further and find that it is owned by the same company as Mygreatgifts.com. You denied it as it is mirror site and has the same content as 100 other sites in your category. The owner come to the resource zone or emails you. He finds it was denied and starts ranting "Why did you denied my site it IS unique, I designed it and picked the colors myself. Why did you list Mygreatgifts.com and not mine other site? They are different!! The coffee mugs are $2.98 on one site and $2.99 on the other. Shouldn't users have to right to see the different prices? You are a power abusing idiot and I bet you have listed 10 of your own sites in that category!!!"

That is the argument of 80% of all people ranting to us about being denied. As another editor stated in the RZ, we are a directory not a billboard. Dmoz is meant to collect useful sites for users, not to advertise sites webmasters.

Macdesign's response earlier

Sure it should be listed there - the company is located there
Is a legit answer. For Regional listing in the directory it is listed under the city where the company/store/person is located. If you don't want to be listed in a Regional category, easy, don't show your location on your website. I have sent my sites from my Topical categories over to regional for reason like this...the website is a company website for a plumber in Detroit, MI. The site only provides details on his services and experience and he only offers service to the Detroit Metro area. Should that site be listed in Home/Plumbing? It offers no value to a web surfer located in Mexico, so it doesn't get listed in a Topical category. But rather than just deleting the submission, we send it to Regional/US/States/MI/Detroit/businesses/plumbers where it belongs because the website only focuses on regional area.

As far as why the Vacation Rental site wasn't included in the topical category, I don't know. I don't have permissions in that area of the directory and don't know what the category details are, and I didn't look at the site. But if that category is a spam magnet you can be sure that all sites are reviewed with a strong hand and questioning eyes. These categories are harder to get in because of the attempted abusive submissions that make the editors check everything with a fine-tooth comb and be even stricter with their opinions of what should be added to the category. The site listed there now, may have been added back when it was just another category and guidelines were a little more lenient, but then the spam started coming in heavier and finally now it is the way it is.




Sorry to sound arrogant condescension and defensiveness.
But I just had to respond to some ideas, and comments made in this thread.

I am not trying to start a flame war and I do not think Dmoz is perfect. But I felt that some comments were made without understanding everything behind the directory. I could care less if Dmoz disappeared, I have enough in my life to fill it, but I find contributing to the directory somewhat fulfilling as well as fun as I get to visit different sites and see how the different sites angle to usability. And if my 2 sites waiting for review in the directory never get added that is fine too, my first site has grown to 40,000 visitors a month in the last 2 year without the link from Dmoz.

[rob777]

- Continued - Final -



My constructive contribution to this thread...
1. Follow the guideline provided when submitting your site.
2. Submit to the appropriate category.
3. Don't submit over and over again.
4. Don't start trouble with an editor of the category you’re trying to get into, because unfortunately they may be a bad editor and abuse their privileges (then hopefully be caught and dealt with)
5. If you happen to submit your site to a spam targeted category, you better follow the submission form to a Tee, and have some useful, unique, interesting!, and abundant content to set your self apart from the spam. The editors might have a bad taste in their mouth when editing that category and you might be in negative position just from the company of sites in the list with you. But remember, First impressions can be a good thing...fill out the submission form so it looks like a perfect guideline following site, and maybe the editor will have a good first impression before visiting your site. It can only help!


Ok, now let me have it for defending Dmoz. :rolleyes:

Later,
Rob

[Blogmaster]

are you assuming we are reading thru all this? Give me a break.

[rob777]

Tutor,

Read what ever you want. I just wanted to add my opinions to the the comments made. If you don't want to read it all, fine, don't. I like to write, even if it is all for nothing.

Later,
Rob

[Blogmaster]

Rob, that is what is so bad about the DMOZ instructions in general, they are so long. I want to read it and will try later. keyphrase try ...

[minstrel]

Holy crap, rob777. Didn't you get the hint when you exceeded the post limit the first time around?

For those who don't want to read the whole thing, here's the summary: Rob claims that some DMOZ editors aren't corrupt although many are
some DMOZ editors aren't lazy although many are
some DMOZ editors really believe in the DMOZ vision, although many don't
DMOZ editors are busy volunteers with limited time who deserve our sympathy (although apparently they have ample time to write enclopedic posts defending DMOZ or hours of free time to spend insulting and stonewalling people at the Resourceless Zone)
Thanks, rob77, for clearing that up! :D

[anthonycea]

Hey Rob, we are happy you stopped by and thank you for your efforts in posting information.

It is late and I can't read it all as your posts are long but I will read them later.

The main problem folks have is a lack of real time communication with the DMOZ directory, in a real time world DMOZ is far from that and it turns webmasters off.

So changes must happen or this directory is doomed in the end.

Thanks for stopping by and we hope you remain a member of Digital Point :)

[rob777]

Wow! You really summed it! :eek:

But you could have went shorter; You could have just said, "Summary=same crap said many times before"

I suppose I should have just said that. Now you all think I am a Dmoz crusader. :o Preaching the cause.

Later,
Rob

[Blogmaster]

Rob the problem is miscommunication, and as long as resource zone operates the way it does, there will never be good communication.

[Blogmaster]

Since you took the time to write this, here is my thought:
Sometimes all people need is a simple answer to a simple question instead of 3 ppl telling them how sick they are of answering questions. Does that make sense?

[rob777]

I agree 100 %, Tutor.

[minstrel]

Yes... even if they ARE sick of ansering questions. And the fact that the same questions get asked over and over again should tell DMOZ that there is something wrong with the system -- but instead they interpret as something wrong with the people asking the questions.

[Blogmaster]

from now on I will post my main thoughts in my own forum (http://www.national-real-estate-directory.com/real-estate-forum/showthread.php?p=2768#post2768) which is always open for discussion.

[anthonycea]

Can I curse you over there too TOOT :confused:

[minstrel]

Can I curse you over there too TOOT?
LMAO!

Okay, somebody got to you, didn't they, Tutor? Who was it? :eek:

"That wasn't part of the plan! It wasn't part of the plan!" - Homer J. Simpson

[Blogmaster]

I just think the arguing gets nowhere and it alienates good ideas from coming up. I am friends with some great editors, some are members here and others are even moderators on places like ihelpyou forums. There are however some instigators on the forefront in some places who enjoy playing around. I believe this will change. For the better. Let's not label everyone. That is like being labelled a spammer because you ask a question about your own site's review. It just came to me when Summer got on, that it all goes 2 ways. I myself want to be a part of the solution and not the ongoing problem.

Peace!

[minstrel]

It's too late for that, ST -- you're part of the solution now whether you like it or not. Besides, you've got a truckload of rubber sheep to worry about... that stuff won't stya fresh forever, you know. :eek:

[Collusion]

Rob, I personally think you have provided alot of information that is helpful. Alot of us at WPW have been asking for answers and you went into detail on what exactly is done while editing a catagory. I think we have a breakthru! A DMOZ editor sharing information instead of saying bug off.

[Blogmaster]

There are many good editors, Rob is definitely one. There are a lot of DMOZ editors here who don't want anyone to know that they are. But they have told me. It is not an us against them thing.

[rob777]

Collusion,

Thanks. Hopefully I can help more people understand how things work over there and in the end make my "job" ;) a little more easy.


Tutor,

Ahhh schucks :o

[jlawrence]

One thing that DMOZ could do - which would I think improve things quite a lot - would be:
send an email out confirming submission. The email could be something like:
your site has been submitted in to the queue where there are currently xxxx sites awiting validation.
and something similar if the site is rejected.

That alone would clear up a lot of the problems.

One of the major problems (other than some editors attitudes) is that no one knows whether their site submission even made it into the queue.

[gworld]

Collusion,

Thanks. Hopefully I can help more people understand how things work over there and in the end make my "job" ;) a little more easy.


Tutor,

Ahhh schucks :o


Hi

I would love to learn how things work. Can you please explain for me since DMOZ is "human" edited directory, how come there are so many 1 page web sites that are just a door way site for the same company or the same editor's business?

If you don't know which sites I mean, you can look in my WPW postings for setp by step proof with search results from DMOZ and Google.

[Blogmaster]

gworld, Rob is not in WPW.Can you show some examples here?

[gworld]

Sitetutor,

This was part of my response to cbp, I think about Oct. 2004 when he asked for proof about DMOZ corruption, so every one can check the facts by themselves through search in DMOZ and Google.

"....
Let's check the quality of your editors, go to DMOZ.org, search for word porn, 6264 results are shown.

I clicked on the first 5 listing (1-5), all are small door way picture sites that are affiliate of maximumcash.com and get customers for that site.

I got tired after 5, go through all the 6264 and I can bet at least 95% will be this type of sites. "


"... Let's talk about facts. One of the editors for DMOZ uses the name: *****mistress

1- Search for this name on google, it shows the same user name is advertising sites on different web sites with with telephone number 1-900-321-****

2- Search Google for the same telephone number. you will get a list of different url. mostly one page ad web sites.
Some of the Domains are:

Asian-sweet******.com
Black-phone-***.com
Sweetblack****.com
..............
..............

3- Search DMOZ.org for the same domains. You will see these domains are listed 4,7 and 3 times. Is really a one page ad web site, so important that has to be listed 7 times? Or has the editor spammed DMOZ to get listed 7 times?

4- The total links for these 3 sites is 14 on DMOZ, now multiply this number by 4000 that you mentioned as the number of sites that use DMOZ as their directory and you will get 56000 links for only the three mentioned web sites.

Not bad for so called little "VOLUNTEER" work."

[macdesign]

The question about getting automatic verification has been asked at least a thousand times, and the answer has always [and will continue to be] the same one. It will not happen.

There are several reasons - the primary one being that any kind of automatic verification/rejection give information to the large numbers of industrial strength spam submitters.

If the site got accepted you can see it's there - and if the search system ever worked that would help [in fact any technical resources would be better spent on that] to find it if it got accepted in a different category.

If the sites got rejected, it's better that no-one knows - since that would encourage them to submit again.

If a site that was listed got removed due to some technical problem - such as a DNS error it would be nice to have a notification procedure. In cases like this I [and some other editors also] will send an email to the webmaster.

[minstrel]

The question about getting automatic verification has been asked at least a thousand times, and the answer has always [and will continue to be] the same one. It will not happen.

There are several reasons - the primary one being that any kind of automatic verification/rejection give information to the large numbers of industrial strength spam submitters.
Absolute nonsense!

What information would it give? That the spam site had been rejected? And that is going to help spammers how?

The reason it won't happen isn't because it isn't a damn good idea. It's because DMOZ editors really don't want non-DMOZ people to know anything about what DMOZ editors do and don't do.

This is the kind of canned DMOZ response that really gets my dander up -- at least give us credit for not being complete morons!

Geeze! :mad:

[rob777]

gworld,

The Adults categories are whole other world from what I am used to (Sciences, Arts, and Business).

But... I checked like you pointed out and everything looks fine to me. I searched, I clicked the first few that came up and it was as expected--an entry page of course, and then another banner page, and how many porn sites have everything on the first page? My thinking is zero; they load the pages with banners and have an "Enter" link at the bottom to go to the actual pictures. They don't make the site to give away free pics and not expect to make any money on the site. The ones I clicked through all stayed on the same domain as the entry page (no redirect), I had to navigate through all the banners to get to the free picture, but they were there.

From what I can tell, if the category is Adult: Image Galleries: Hardcore: Free: F, the description says "This category is for free sites containing at least 20 hardcore images starting with the letter "F". If a site meets this description and the adult guidelines found here (http://dmoz.org/guidelines/adult/), then it has every right to be listed.

And another fact is Adult is the most spammed category of the whole ODP. I stands to reason that a few spamming webmasters will apply (appearing to be on the up and up) and maybe be given permissions to edit. Then of course they will abuse the system just like they do everywhere else. They are monitored and dealt with when found out. But there are so many categories, so many listings, so many editors, and so few eyes from higher up IN THE ODP that they can't always catch editors abusing right that minute.

And if the site listed is a redirect or what ever. Have you ever thought maybe an unscrupulous webmaster submitted a legit submission, and changed the page after it became listed? This could have nothing to do with an editor. There are so many sites listed that editors can't scan every one every day. So it may take a while to catch it and deal with it. If you find these, report the listing to bring it to an editor’s attention quicker.

If you find abuse... report it with facts to make it a legit complaint and not just a sour webmaster complaining about the system.

As far as who owns the sites...I don't know and I don't care. There are 66,375 sites listed in the Adult sections, I really doubt they are all editor's sites.

I mean come on use some common sense, the adult world on the web is a majority of less than straight up webmasters, and of course the ODP is all volunteer (they do not advertise in newspapers to get editors, so 99% of editors are webmasters), and of course there is gonna be abuse ON BOTH sides of DMOZ, but there are checks and balances within and options for public to report abuse to Dmoz. The size of Dmoz just makes it take a little time to find the abusers.

By The way, there is no rules against an editor listing a site of their own...except they have to divulge their affiliations with any sites and the site has to meet the ODP guidelines &Category descriptions AND they are supposed to give no special preference to their sites. If they break these rules they are found and dealt with, if they bend the rules slightly but continue to edit like they are supposed to, they are warned and the bending is taken care of by the higher ups.

And By the way those dead sites still listed have already been deleted on the editor side and will be removed with the next public-side refresh.

I know that no amount of me explaining will change your views. So if you don't like the way things are-- apply to edit, read the guidelines and whip some categories back into shape. Try to be part of the solution or else everything you complain about is a waste of time. Arguing on message boards will not put an end to "alleged abuse" Only an honest, active role in the ODP will help to push out the "abusers".

Later,
Rob

[rob777]

Minstrel,

I agree some what.

I personally don't see a problem with a automatic email "thanks we got your submission"

In fact I think that would be a nice thing to implement to reduce spam if changed slightly. Like they would have to click a conformation email to have their submission forwarded to the unreviewed list. If they didn't click the varify link in the email then after 4 hours (or what ever time) then their submission would be deleted. I think this would slow the spam submissins down. and give the editors more time time to spend on quailty sites.

****************

I think the email for being accepted would be ok.

But no automatic email for a rejected listing, as pointed out it would encourage them submit again.

{we can't send a personal email to rejections telling them whats wrong with thier site, because that would really take a LOT of time. And of course the arguments that would erupt from webmasters taking it as a personal insult on their webmastering skills.}

An the same reason for not having an email to notify if a site is moved to another category.

*************************

404's are tagged by the system and placed in unreviewed. typically if they are still 404 a couple weeks later, they are deleted by the editor (some editors leave them in longer, I have accually checked on 404s that were in unreview for up to 1 year later and still 404, so I deleted them.) I generally hold them 2-4 weeks.

But an email would be kind of pointless at times, what if the email used to submit the site was whatever@that site.com.

So I am on the fence with this one.

*****************

Later,
Rob

[gworld]

rob777

Does DMOZ sends all the editors to a special course when they start?
Your response is exactly the same as all editors, except longer. The short version of this will be:

1- It is not our fault that DMOZ is lousy both as a directory and the way it does business. It is spammers fault and every one who does not agree with us is a spammer.

2- We are "volunteers", so you can not protest that we are corrupt or do a lousy job, what do you expect, we are "volunteers"

3- If there is a corruption, don't make a fuss about, report it to us, we don't do anything about it but you will feel better and it won't be public.

4- be part of solution, blah,blah, blah. the only problem is when you try to be part of solution and apply to be an editor, we won't except you, it is against DMOZ policy to accept honest people.

5- Did we mention that we are "volunteers", if you have reached so far, go to step one and start again.

can you tell me the why the "human" edited directory needs so many sites that are affiliate of the same web site maximumcash.com? Why not take away all the 1 page sites and just put a link to the source, if you have some kind of quality control. If you don't have any quality control, why not add all the affiliates automatically to a category?

Your version may be longer and better than cbp's version but it is the same song and dance.

[anthonycea]

Just give up on CBP, that is like putting faith in Hitler, in the end he is a loser :o

Just forget about him and DMOZ and focus on building good sites with great content and the Search Engines will index your sites without DMOZ.

I have many # 1 SERP's in a lot of keywords and none of the sites are in DMOZ.

Quit wasting time on DMOZ :o

[gworld]

Just give up on CBP, that is like putting faith in Hitler, in the end he is a loser :o

Just forget about him and DMOZ and focus on building good sites with great content and the Search Engines will index your sites without DMOZ.

I have many # 1 SERP's in a lot of keywords and none of the sites are in DMOZ.

Quit wasting time on DMOZ :o

anthony,

I don't care about cbp or DMOZ, I just don't like corrupt bullies.

The site I have, is just a hobby for me, I made it for my girl friend in the beginning, so she has something to play with while going to school.

Just now the site is indexed by all major search engines and I have about 5000 unique/day without any advertising.

If you look at the other thread in this section, I just bought 4 DMOZ listed domains that I don't even use to market my site and all of the those sites show content from different DMOZ discussions.
The one with biggest number of links actually is showing this forum. :D

[rob777]

gworld,

lol no there is no special course. But in the process of editing you are constantly reffering to the guidelines and rules.

The reason why all editors responses are the same is because the guidleines are always the same and the answers we provide are based on the guidelines.

1- It is not our fault that DMOZ is lousy both as a directory and the way it does business. It is spammers fault and every one who does not agree with us is a spammer.

Most of Dmoz is not lousy. The parts that are lousy are the parts that are spam targets/(Topics). Most editors that apply for these areas are from the same population that operates in these spammy topics of the internet. Thus some of the editors that do get approved take advantage of their powers (while they can) and abuse the system. Just like here at DP, some webmasters are stupid enough to sign up so they can post their 1 or 2 spam threads. But Dmoz is much larger and takes longer to "delete or ban a spam thread (site, editor, what ever)


2- We are "volunteers", so you can not protest that we are corrupt or do a lousy job, what do you expect, we are "volunteers"

Exactly! Again I stand by the fact that people are so varied in human nature, that you will have idiots and abusers, but that is not everyone that edits for Dmoz. If you are not an idiot, and you are not an abuser... then join up and help out, that will be one less spot for an idiot/abuser to step into.

3- If there is a corruption, don't make a fuss about, report it to us, we don't do anything about it but you will feel better and it won't be public.

I did not say or imply don't make a fus about. I meant that by ranting in forums will not change anything. I only makes the accuser look like a disguntled webmaster that is mad because he didn't get listed. If you report abuse it is investigated (I believe it is also looked into by the staff (the only 2 or 3 people that are paid employees of ODP)). There are so many Metas that are also involved with abuse investigations that I don't think it is possible for all of them to be corrupt and just dismiss an abuse report.

Trust me I have reported abuse and watched things from the inside and there were a few different editors that stepped in and dealt with the problem. Abuse is not taken lightly, because they know the history of editors signing up abusing and leaving. So they try to watch closely and when something is reported they do investigate.

If they did not dismiss an editor that you reported, maybe they found that they was no evidence of abuse, or maybe they warned the editor and changed his screw ups, or maybe they only found that the editor didn't completely understand how to edit properly-so they warn and help the editor with mentoring and other assistance.

4- be part of solution, blah,blah, blah. the only problem is when you try to be part of solution and apply to be an editor, we won't except you, it is against DMOZ policy to accept honest people.

That is not true. I had to apply 3 times before I got in. They reject applications because of the samples that you submit. If you didn't use the correct title, bad spelling, hype, puncuation, didn't follow the guidelines, etc. they will reject an application.

And are you saying something about me because I'm an editor? I have been there for 2 yrs and I do not have 1 single site listed anywhere in the whole directory. I have 1 site waiting for review since 2003, and 1 site waiting since 2 months ago. The site waiting since 2003 is in an unreviewed list (with 1100 other sites) of a category that I'M the named editor of (since Jan 2004). Now you tell me that "it is against DMOZ policy to accept honest people." Yeah ok.


The editors at ODP are the same people that you associate with on the webmaster forums. So unless you think all webmasters are corrupt idiots, don't think ALL editors are corrupt idiots. They are all from the same community.


Later,
Rob

[minstrel]

I think the email for being accepted would be ok.

But no automatic email for a rejected listing, as pointed out it would encourage them submit again.

{we can't send a personal email to rejections telling them whats wrong with thier site, because that would really take a LOT of time. And of course the arguments that would erupt from webmasters taking it as a personal insult on their webmastering skills.}

An the same reason for not having an email to notify if a site is moved to another category.
Again, this is unmitigated nonsense.

An email to say that the site has been accepted would be nice, yes. But if it's been accepted in the category to which it was submitted, presumably the submitter can find it there himself or herself.

It is precisely when a site has (1) been moved to another category or (2) been rejected outright that the email should be mandatory. That should be considered simple courtesy, although one certainly does not get the impression from the Resourceless Zone that any kind of courtesy is even understood at DMOZ. And it would save a lot of repeated inquiries at RZ from submitters wondering if the site has been rejected or is merely languishing like thousands of others for months or years on end in the queue.

How will either encourage spam? It does not have to identify the specific editor who made the decision (it can be sent anonymously from a generic DMOZ mailbox). It can provide a list of generic reasons for rejection. It can even indicate that the decision cannot be appealed (if only to spare the webmaster the futility of trying to appeal). As for encouraging the webmaster to submit again, the email could even suggest that to do so is futile. Or, to be truly honest, that submitting to a different category or at a different time might well result in the site being accepted if a different editor reviews it.

Nor is anyone asking for a personal email - that's just ridiculous. Pick one of three canned emails: (1) your site has been accepted and is listed in {category}, (2) your site has been moved to {category} for review, or (3) your site has been rejected: please see {url or list below} for reasons.

All of this is academic, of course. I am fully aware that there is no way in hell that DMOZ will ever institute such a system, partly because it DOES make sense and partly because someone somewhere said "no" and that is the way DMOZ operates -- the Lord DMOZ the Infallible has spoken and we will not allow reason or information to confuse us now.

Just please do not insult us with these pathetic excuses and pseudo logic.

[jlerner]

According to this posting in the Resource Zone, editors are not obligated to review sites on a first come - first serve basis. How then are sites selected for review? If anyone could shed some light on this process, I would be most grateful.

Here is a link to the posting below (http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=178177&postcount=10)



No, I'm sorry, there is no indication of how long it is going to be before the site gets reviewed.

And knowing how many other sites are waiting to be reviewed doesn't help much either, because editors do not have to review sites in the order they were submitted. Even if only one site awaits reveiw, there is no telling when an editor will get around to reviewing it, since all editors are volunteers.

Hope this helps explain how this works.

[Blogmaster]

Don't take it out on each other, guys!
Take it to AOL, they can make a difference.
jLerner, that is what our blog is for
http://dmozpetition.blogspot.com
to end the communication barrier and start shining some light.

[jlerner]

Thanks ST - and thanks to everyone who drove this effort.

[Blogmaster]

I have just added it in my real estate forum (http://www.national-real-estate-directory.com/real-estate-forum/showthread.php?p=3277#post3277)

[rob777]

jlerner,

From a post I made in another thread. Over here (http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=148375#post148375)

Because the way an unreviewed list is displayed to us is in 4 options.
We can sort by date submitted, alphabetical url, title, or category.

There is also the regular list display. which lists sites newest at the top to the oldest at the bottom...(but this is not in a 100% order because of the sites that editors moved from different categories. A 2001 submission might be between an April 2002 and a May 2003, because the other editor sent it over to this category in that time frame.

Basically their comment was right. We can sort the list anyway mentioned in the qoute above. Plus, we see the whole list of sites waiting for that category and we can jump to the middle of the list and start there. There is no set rule that says we have to edit the first ones submitted. But usually we try to do it that way, to get the oldest submissions taken care of first.

There may be a bunch of old submissions waiting at the top of the list, but if the title, description, and url (deeplink) are looking like spam, we might skip them and move down to a legit looking submission and start there.

We seriously get submissions like this,
Title
Example.com your number one source for water filteres - water, bottled water, spring water, etc.

Description
We have been selling our 100% pure alpine spring water for the last 15 years. We are the largest mobile water supplier in all of India. Blah blah blah

Url
w w . example . com /hot products/ clear water/ about us. htm

With crap like that and we skip over it and move on to a site that the submitter accually took the time to read the directions, and more than likely is in the right category. We hit the easier edits first than go back to the crap when the legit submissions are caught up.

Now not all submission are that bad, but if it isn't to guidelines like instructed when filling out the submissin form...it looks like it might be either a spam, or an edit that will take a little longer to straighten out to conform to guidelines.

Make you submission close to perfect as you can, and you might have a better chance of getting reviewed sooner, if the peticular editor is one who hits the easier ones first. I do this often, but I also try to get the older ones caught up too.


Later,
Rob

[Blogmaster]

Don't worry Joey, SiteTutor is going to get this thing solved for the community :p :p :eek:
Well said :)
With you guys' support!!

[jlerner]

There may be a bunch of old submissions waiting at the top of the list, but if the title, description, and url (deeplink) are looking like spam, we might skip them and move down to a legit looking submission and start there.

Many thanks Rob777 - this makes sense.

[anthonycea]

Minstrel and I just can't figure you out TOOT, the other day you were giving up because you thought that if you continued fighting about standards that you would never get any of your customers sites listed in DMOZ.

You were going to get together with the editors and discuss all of this real nice, now you are back at the DMOZ threads again :confused:

What happened man, did you miss the spotlight :confused: :p :D

[Blogmaster]

Anthony, I have tried to reach out and find some sort of communication. I would like to be a part of finding a solution here. I see a lot of time being wasted. The editors getting screwed as well, there is no support from above. And they need to be kept in line, too. I think it is time to get those involved who can do something. Rob is doing great but where are the ones who can make decisions and make DMOZ better?
AOL is ignoring their responsibilty - it's not about taking sides but doing what is right.
I think we have all put in a ton of energy into this and don't think that we should be beating up one another (pro and anti DMOZ).
I have realized that on Yahoo!'s official blog where Yahoo! closed the comment option after me and a DMOZ editor got into it where they were asking about feedback to their new algorithm.

[Not Hutcheson]

Hey all,

I just wanted to post here to put my vote in for the pure hatred I have for the DMOZ, more importantly this childish editor Hutcheson.

I did see that we are once again in a forum bashing Hutcheson. I give you my punching bag user name. So have at it! IF any of you have been insulted, berated, cut-off etc.... here is your chance to use me as a punching bag. :)

I do have a few questions for the "ego-stroking" Hutcheson

1. Why do you not come out of your cave at the resource-zone?
2. Honestly do you have a life?
3. What do you do for a living that makes you so.....?
4. Does your wife beat you?
5. Or.... are you not married and still live at home with your parents?


I send this as an open invitation for Hutcheson to come out of his cave, and come play on a level playing field.

[Design Agent]

I never realised a few links could make people this angry :D

[Blogmaster]

here is something all DMOZ editors should look at http://www.national-real-estate-directory.com/real-estate-forum/showpost.php?p=3556&postcount=35

[Not Hutcheson]

DMOZ editors do not care what you think. Period. When will you learn this?


hutcheson

[DarrenC]

Ummm what did I start! :(

Did anyone answer my questions? lol

I've been busy earning money but thanks for the good (and slightly comical) thread!

Now get back to work and forget DMOZ - I have.

[sarahk]

here is something all DMOZ editors should look at ...
Crikey Mike, wave a big red flag. I got told to edit that post, now I see why!

Sarah

[Blogmaster]

geesh sorry :(