How to get listed in DMOZ, the easy way. 2 days.

[crossman]

And Crossman, go do your homework. The grownups are talking here. :rolleyes:
By the childish post and actions by some in the dmoz forum I thought I have been talking to 12 years olds :eek:

Ooops. Is he a midget ?:eek:
What?:confused: Nope

[minstrel]

Is he a midget?
No. Just a kid who thinks he has something important to teach us... :rolleyes:

[popotalk]

originally posted by crossman
By the childish post and actions by some in the dmoz forum I thought I have been talking to 12 years olds
Be careful on what you say crossy. There are psychos watching what you disclose.

What?:eek: Nope
If your not a midget maybe has weinie ?

[kkibak]

Google have gone on record as saying that they zero rate expired domains, so realistically you will be starting afresh, but will get the benefit from the various backlinks from sites using dmozdata.

Unless of course those dmoz clones already had the links up..

But still a very good point, as it would be a benefit in terms of new sites scraping the data (although I guess there might be some kind of duplicate content penalty on those ones).

Also, I don't think this "resetting" applies to Yahoo and would be shocked if it applied to MSN, so keep that in mind. I can second the person above in that I heard Matt Cutts specifically verify that links to expired domains lose their weight.

edit: whoa I didn't realize this was a 13 page post and pressed reply after getting half way through the first page, so i apologize if the above has already been stated.

[gworld]

It is not at all about the dynamics of change. It is about the dynamics of power

It is not at all about the dynamics of change. It is about the dynamics of power

You are right, if honest editors had any influence on how DMOZ is managed, this situation would have been resolved long time ago.

[Ivan Bajlo]

Hmmm, let's see. These are the people who, when confronted with pedophile chat rooms listed in the directory, not only did not take immediate action to remove them but castigated an editor that did and restored the sites to public view, then took weeks to decide that the sites were indeed bad for the DMOZ image and removed them again. Then claimed the delay was because it was difficult to reach agreement on a form of words. These are the people who did untold harm to the integrity of the directory way beyond anything any single corrupt editor has ever done by accepting cash for a listing. And they don't even think they did anything wrong, they blame others for kicking up a stink.

Damn, I new I should have got connected with porn crew from the start - I would have been untouchable - instead I had nobody to cover my a** and got used as scapegoat instead. :rolleyes:

[brizzie]

I new I should have got connected with porn crew from the start - I would have been untouchable
Not exactly if you are basing that on the pedophile chat rooms - the editor got kicked out years ago. I hope they remembered to report him/her to the FBI.

It is not at all about the dynamics of change. It is about the dynamics of power
I wouldn't disagree with that. But remember that DMOZ is not a community controlled voluntary project, it is a corporate-owned project that uses voluntary labour. To alter the power and effect change you need to take it out of corporate ownership and democratise. I can't see those with the power now going along with that and possession is nine tenths of the law.

[gworld]

I wouldn't disagree with that. But remember that DMOZ is not a community controlled voluntary project, it is a corporate-owned project that uses voluntary labour. To alter the power and effect change you need to take it out of corporate ownership and democratise. I can't see those with the power now going along with that and possession is nine tenths of the law.

Again, you are assuming that it is AOL corporation policy to engage in questionable activities as it is committed in DMOZ. I suggest instead that because of low priority of DMOZ in AOL corporation structure (DMOZ is something inherited from Netscape), AOL management has no real interest in what is happening in DMOZ or desire to fix it and that makes it possible for a small group to effectively control ODP for their own personal benefit.
Therefore the key to the change will be to make DMOZ such a public relation nightmare for AOL that AOL management HAVE to deal with situation and clean it up. ;)

[helleborine]

Boy, am I glad ODP links are pretty much worthless! If the links really counted, it would skew search results to display a disproportionate amount of cobwebbed old sites that were popular in 2002.

Good thing what happens at the ODP doesn't count in the grand scheme of things, because it would be a disaster...

Let's count our blessings that Google has long stopped giving the ODP links "extra love."

[brizzie]

AOL management has no real interest in what is happening in DMOZ or desire to fix it and that makes it possible for a small group to effectively control ODP for their own personal benefit.
Nevertheless, even if this is true, and the AOL board couldn't care less, it remains an asset and they have to retain control whilst that is the case. The easiest thing to do is to transfer ownership to a trust or foundation with a charter that really does reflect an Open Source project. But it is nearly as easy simply to close it completely, or to maintain the status quo and let it slide into oblivion.

Boy, am I glad ODP links are pretty much worthless!
This really is the key. Not only is that a natural dampener on abuse - what is the point of investing thousands of hours to get into a position where you can actually place sites in any category when the end result of that is worth nothing. But also it means that for the majority honest editors the promise that editing makes a difference to the Internet is a sham, their work will not be seen by anyone and will not promote the best sites to the top of search results. From what I can tell Google results actually completely discount DMOZ content entirely (I gave an example as evidence elsewhere). So, if you get rid of the corporate control, democratise, even reinvent the project to make it more relevant, what incentive does anyone have to edit even so? Except as an academic exercise in cataloguing. And it has to be said that there are people who would be happy about that and would enjoy it - they are not, and have never been, in the least interested in whether a single other person gained any benefit from their labours, webmaster or surfer.

If you take gworld's universe as being true then there is a small group of corrupt conspirators jealously guarding what? Absolutely nothing of any value in terms of corruption, a futile exercise.

[helleborine]

Indeed. "Corruption" can only exist if a benefit can be obtained by favoring one's own sites.

Some corrupt editors, and some ODP accusers may believe that a benefit exists. But most webmasters that have several sites, some in DMOZ and some that aren't, etc., can testify that a page or site can rank extremely welll independent of a DMOZ link, and that no causality can be scientifically demonstrated.

The corruption debate is a red herring, no matter how you look at it. It's discussing how many angels fit on the head of a pin. We should laugh at the so-called corrupt editors, rather than hound them, because they are completely deluded. Let them deeplink their own sites and ignore their competitor's submissions. It makes no difference. They may hope it does, but in reality, it does not.

The situation in Adult, which I won't get into, is a shame, even if DMOZ is nothing but an academic exercize.

Sure, the majority of editors, which are honest, volunteer under the mistaken belief that they are making a difference. And that's the tragedy, really. As they realize, slowly, that it isn't the case, they time out. Fewer people will volunteer. Given how few are accepted, and the "you're not really welcome to the club" feel of the application/rejection process, there isn't much hope for the ODP, and it will continue its descent into academic exercizedom.

Editing one site, or a thousand sites, makes no difference.

You ask: "So, if you get rid of the corporate control, democratise, even reinvent the project to make it more relevant, what incentive does anyone have to edit even so?" You know the answer. There is no incentive, unless, and I don't say this with malice, you suffer from OCD.

[brizzie]

The situation in Adult, which I won't get into, is a shame
The whole thing is a shame - there are some superb categories and groups of categories where nothing else out there comes close. I have already started "rescuing" a lot of the work I did (without touching the RDF - you don't know what murky things lurk in there and I'd rather be highly selective) - maybe I can find some way of making it relevant again.

[Ivan Bajlo]

The whole thing is a shame - there are some superb categories and groups of categories where nothing else out there comes close. I have already started "rescuing" a lot of the work I did (without touching the RDF - you don't know what murky things lurk in there and I'd rather be highly selective) - maybe I can find some way of making it relevant again.

Most links (of my so-called competitors) I've added to DMOZ have long time been on my websites and once I fix my website I plan to continue developing my own mini directory of relevant links and since my website is PR5 and gets 2000 visitors a day they should get some benefit out if it - probably lot more then out of DMOZ. ;)

Easiest way to help quality websites you like is to find a way to get them into Wikipedia that should give them huge boost both in traffic and ranking and there is also Google Co-Op.

[brizzie]

Easiest way to help quality websites you like is to find a way to get them into Wikipedia that should give them huge boost both in traffic and ranking and there is also Google Co-Op.
Looking at Wikipedia as an SEO tool and trying to find ways to manipulate it to your advantage is a far more heinous crime in my eyes than trying to spam DMOZ. Google Co-op might develop but what I have seen of it so far doesn't inspire me too greatly.

I plan to continue developing my own mini directory of relevant links and since my website is PR5 and gets 2000 visitors a day they should get some benefit out if it
Best of luck :) I think you are probably right that it will be more productive than doing the same thing within DMOZ. And that is because your directory can contain lots of detailed information alongside the links, something DMOZ is not able to do

[Ivan Bajlo]

Looking at Wikipedia as an SEO tool and trying to find ways to manipulate it to your advantage is a far more heinous crime in my eyes than trying to spam DMOZ.

Who says manipulation automatically has to be bad and evil? If you write useful article and cite some quality websites which you have used as source everyone benefits and nobody is hurt (well maybe some spammer who will lose SE traffic) - it is all about how you chose to (ab)use your skills and power. ;)

I'm actually deleting articles from Wiki because they have been copy/pasted from my website, I could use opportunity to get another backlink but I have so many already it is embarrassing. :D

[compostannie]

Ivan, sometimes you scare me. ;)

[compostannie]

oops, duplicate post

[helleborine]

Google Co-op might develop but what I have seen of it so far doesn't inspire me too greatly.
It'll be what people make of it. It is a great opportunity. That is why I decided to roll up my sleeves, and give Google Co-Op the best possible contribution I could. You can make it inspiring. You don't have to apply, just sign in, and give it your best shot. Are you up to the challenge? Be one of the contributors that make the Co-Op a great project.

[Al Capone]

Games have pretty active team and robbozilla just removed more dead links then new links listed in August. You'll have to wait a while before some link goes dead to play.

Every how often do they "robozilla" whens the best time to look for them?

[helleborine]

Robozilla'd sites won't help you, they're removed from public view and tossed back into the queue.

Maybe you want to find sites before they're Robizilla'd away? Robozilla is unpredictable, no one knows when it's let out of its cage.

[brizzie]

Robozilla is unpredictable, no one knows when it's let out of its cage.
And it isn't the only dead link checker. I used to run the Xenu Link Sleuth from time to time too.

[Al Capone]

And it isn't the only dead link checker. I used to run the Xenu Link Sleuth from time to time too.

your ever have any luck, i went through 70,000 domains in dmoz and no luck, is that normal?

[brizzie]

your ever have any luck, i went through 70,000 domains in dmoz and no luck, is that normal?
I had plenty of luck. But remember I was an editor trying to find bad links to remove not domains to buy. There is not that much good news about DMOZ recently but its lack of 404's at the moment is great.

[compostannie]

... its lack of 404's at the moment is great.
Thanks brizzie, any little bit of praise is always appreciated. :)

[brizzie]

As I said somewhere else I am in the process of "rescuing" some of my work, and ran Xenu Link Sleuth over the first 120 odd links, expecting to have picked up some dead ones. Nothing. I was impressed I have to say.

[Al Capone]

I had plenty of luck. But remember I was an editor trying to find bad links to remove not domains to buy. There is not that much good news about DMOZ recently but its lack of 404's at the moment is great.

Are you saying you didn't buy any of the domains? You just removed them?

[helleborine]

Are you saying you didn't buy any of the domains? You just removed them?
Why would brizzie waste his money on domains that have a worthless DMOZ link?

Now that would be a really stupid use of $$$.

Of course he just removed them. :rolleyes:

[brizzie]

Why would brizzie waste his money on domains that have a worthless DMOZ link?
Why would I have wasted my money on buying listed domains at a premium when I could have bought new ones for next to nothing and listed them in the highest PR categories using my editall rights? But I did neither and it feels pretty good. Not everything in life revolves around $$$.