DMOZ article in webpronews and DP

[Foxy]

DigitalPoint hits the news - written by Chris Richrdson at webpronews


DMOZ Isn't Open After All

Directories can be quite beneficial for those trying to increase the number of backlinks. If PageRank is important, directory listings can help improve your score. Perhaps the most popular directory is DMOZ, an open directory project that employs human editors for the submission/approval procedure. The .....use of human editors is founded on furthering the quality of the directory content.

......

However, human prejudices can factor into the approval process, something that is hard to overcome if you are considering submitting to a competitive category. During the research process, I came across numerous statements about people having to wait months and even years before their site gets accepted into the DMOZ directory......


"I know this is largely dependant on who the admin is for your particular category, but approximately how long is the average Submit -> Listing delay? I submitted in early June... should I check back at Christmas?" Pavel's statement was a humorous look at the wait for DMOZ acceptance. But it begs the question: How long should someone have to wait before they are approved, denied, or contacted about either?
...... poster Kimberly commented about her experience with DMOZ, "I submitted under a heading only to learn 3 months later that the #3 player in my market was the editor. So I picked another headingÉ at least I am in now. It is not a fair system." Judging from Kimberly's statement, it would appear that she was the victim of another's ethical shortcomings. If editors allow personal feelings and competitiveness to affect their judgment, obviously they shouldn't be part of the approval process.



......"Dmoz really is a corrupt system. If the editor in the category has a site in that same category, he'll simply deny any application in the interest of defeating competitionÉ I submitted one of my major sites back in April, and don't expect to ever be listedÉ I even had one of my sites edited so that it went to a different URL, google bombing my main keyword to a competitor. Dmoz should be burned in the fires it was forged."

Again, this is a case of personal prejudices and overlapping business interests interfering with a simple approval process; something that doesn't have to be considered when an automated spider crawls your site. To be fair, every editor that volunteers to DMOZ isn't going to mistreat your submission, although it may be awhile before it gets approved.

...........

Granted, not every testimonial I read was negative. A thread on the Digital Point forums spoke of a DMOZ editor assisting a web site owner in the approval process. The poster had waited about 3 months and still no approval, so they decided to email the category editor. After receiving the mailing, the editor "promptly added [the] site to dmoz." So there is still hope.

The thing I'm left wondering is if all it took was an email to get the approval going, what was going on the 3 months beforehand? Was the editor that busy? Or were they being negligent to their submission queue? Such are the risks when relying on human intervention.

[ResaleBroker]

If DMOZ is so bad and PR is no more then why do webmasters keep submitting? :confused:

[joeychgo]

who said pr is no more?

Backlinks is the foundation of SEO -- and a DMOZ listing can give you 200-300 backlinks all at once.

[candysmith]

I sincerely wish there was something that could be done about this.
I am a "victim" of this.... My site was REMOVED from its main category where it had been for 6 years.... although there are dead sites listed (404 not found) and some very suspect listings too. However, other editors have obviously found the site and listed sub-directories in sub-related categories (6 in total) so clearly it is not a sub standard site that is not 'good enough' for the Dmoz directory! In the country it is based it is seen as an authority site so why has it been excluded from its main category? Dmoz editors play web-god when they choose to remove sites.

Fortunately Google don't seem to take Dmoz that seriously anymore because we are #1 in Google, Yahoo! and MSN for our search terms so let them play Web-Gods ... that is where their actions get them - Google disregarding the importance of the Web-Gods.

[ResaleBroker]

Backlinks will always be important. Popularity is popularity.

The recent speculation on many boards is that PR as we used to know it is on its way out the window.

My point is simple. If getting into DMOZ is such a hassle and takes so long why bother? Even more so, why support that type of behavior? For 200-300 backlinks?

[joeychgo]

Yup -- plus it gets you into several hundred directories, like the Google directory-

DMOZ is free - Yahoo charges $300 to get into theirs -

[ResaleBroker]

To each their own. :)

[schlottke]

Waiting a year vs. paying 300$... Id pay 300..

[Michael]

Chris Richardson's article reminds me of the journalist who filed front line stories on the invasion of Iraq while closeted in his NY apartment. If Chris had spent five minutes talking to an editor he would know the answer to his own question "...what was going on the 3 months beforehand"? The answer of course is the editor was sifting through the 95% of submissions that are absolute crap. All editors get emails and 95% of these are crap too but on the very rare occasion when one arrives that is polite and helpful it is not usually ignored.

- Michael

[DarrenC]

I predict within the next 2 years Google will drop DMOZ and then no one will bother about submitting to DMOZ - 95% of the people who do submit now its because of the submission in Google directory and the link.

The problem with DMOZ is the large number of egotistic editors. Full stop.

[leer]

You could always fill in the refund request form.

[DarrenC]

Yes, its free - we know that. That's the kind of comment Ive heard on the resource zone :D

[minstrel]

You could always fill in the refund request form.
Yes, its free - we know that. That's the kind of comment I've heard on the resource zone
Yes. And it's no more helpful or any less arrogant and pointless here than it is there.

[Smyrl]

With any systems there can be problems, however I wish to thank the DMOZ editors who give their time to the process.

I have submitted many sites to DMOZ and have had all but one listed. Have resubmitted and after six months will put in a query regarding site. The majority of editors appear to be hard working individual.

Thanks, again.

Shannon

[leer]

minstrel I see that your whole attitiude is one to critise ODP and its editors for being arrogant and such like yet you fail to see that you are portraying the very same attitude yourself.

You are saying thoroughtout this forum what should and should not be said - just like what ODP says should and should not be put on their site and forum.


Yes. And it's no more helpful or any less arrogant and pointless here than it is there.

I did not pick up the mud and start throwing it. I did not start a thread saying webmasters are blah blah blah. If you are going to accept people, including yourself, to throw abusive remarks and comments in one direction don't get on your high horse when you end up facing some yourself.

[minstrel]

minstrel I see that your whole attitiude is one to critise ODP and its editors for being arrogant and such like yet you fail to see that you are portraying the very same attitude yourself.

You are saying thoroughtout this forum what should and should not be said - just like what ODP says should and should not be put on their site and forum.
No I am saying that ODP is a misnomer - that it is not an "open" directory and people who submit to it and/or promote it should be aware of that. DMOZ can do whatever it wants. But "ODP"/DMOZ is a set of bookmarks, no more, no less. And it's, in my opinion, a much overrated set of bookmarks at that. Let's not pretend any different.

Yes. And it's no more helpful or any less arrogant and pointless here than it is there.
I did not pick up the mud and start throwing it. I did not start a thread saying webmasters are blah blah blah. If you are going to accept people, including yourself, to throw abusive remarks and comments in one direction don't get on your high horse when you end up facing some yourself.
I did not start the thread either. I also don't see how my remarks are "abusive" or "mudslinging", not even the one you quote. "Ask for a refund" is not helpful at all. It is, however, typical of the responses of DMOZ editors, as the other poster observed. If you feel abused when I point that out, may I suggest that you reflect upon how you believed that would be a helpful response to any of the questions or criticisms raised in this thread or elsewhere? Indeed, it is comments like "Ask for a refund" that provide evidence supportive of those who complain about DMOZ and fodder for further dissatisfaction with the directory.

[leer]

<yawn> I may 'also' be ane editor but I am also a human individual with my own life outside of ODP so ODP dont speak for me and vice versa.

Whether I say get a refund or get lost - what has it got to do with ODP? The only thing it has to do with ODP is that you cling onto the remark with both hands and try and use it as an extra pityful excuse to prove a point which concerns noone but the people whom DMOZ do not serve in the first place.

[minstrel]

<yawn> I may 'also' be ane editor but I am also a human individual with my own life outside of ODP so ODP dont speak for me and vice versa.

Whether I say get a refund or get lost - what has it got to do with ODP? The only thing it has to do with ODP is that you cling onto the remark with both hands and try and use it as an extra pityful excuse to prove a point which concerns noone but the people whom DMOZ do not serve in the first place.
Proving the point yet again and apparently not even realizing it...

[DarrenC]

Whether I say get a refund or get lost - what has it got to do with ODP? The only thing it has to do with ODP is that you cling onto the remark with both hands and try and use it as an extra pityful excuse to prove a point which concerns noone but the people whom DMOZ do not serve in the first place.

Yes, let's voice our comments and feedback about the ODP/DMOZ at the organ grinder not the monkeys - but where are the organ grinders? As a business (yes I know your a volunteer editor - but DMOZ/ODP is a business) you should listen to peoples comments, and feedback and bear that in mind.

Instead people go to the forum and are in my opinion treated like idiots by egotistic individuals who think they are above it all. Let's get the real people who run out here and let them answer the questions that many many people have to ask.

[minstrel]

people go to the forum and are in my opinion treated like idiots by egotistic individuals who think they are above it all. Let's get the real people who run out here and let them answer the questions that many many people have to ask.
Sadly, that won't help a bit. On occasion, the "organ grinders" as you put it do come out to reply on behalf of the "monkeys" but all they'll give you is the same song the "monkeys" sing -- which makes sense, if you think about it... who do you think composed those songs?

[leer]

Critical as ever I see (from me and not the editor).

[minstrel]

Well, really... you didn't seriously believe that posting a comment like "you could always fill in the refund request form" was going to suddenly change anyone's mind, did you?

[Blogmaster]

Yes, let's voice our comments and feedback about the ODP/DMOZ at the organ grinder not the monkeys - but where are the organ grinders? As a business (yes I know your a volunteer editor - but DMOZ/ODP is a business) you should listen to peoples comments, and feedback and bear that in mind.

Instead people go to the forum and are in my opinion treated like idiots by egotistic individuals who think they are above it all. Let's get the real people who run out here and let them answer the questions that many many people have to ask.
Good point! Let's keep the good suggestions coming here:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=15673
Like I said, why get on those who don't have a say so in the matter? It's pointless to say the least.

[nddb]

CandySmith,

although there are dead sites listed (404 not found) and some very suspect listings too

It's amazing how many sites on DMOZ don't have DNS entries. I pulled down quite a few dmoz pages, parsed out all the .com|.net|.org links and found hundreds of active domains with no DNS entries. And quite a few domains that were around a month past expiration (and no DNS entry). (BTW, I think I checked considerably less than .1% of the sites on DMOZ, there's a lot! I think I looked ~13k, but a quite a few were dupes so it's hard to say, and I'm not that interested, just thought I'd give gworld's trick a try. =))

Going through, there are also some REALLY bad sites listed in DMOZ. Terrible sites that have zero content, and are sitting on geocities or something like that. I have no idea how they got approved in the first place.

[Blogmaster]

I have noticed the same thing, actually once had a site listed and let the domain name expire. 6 months after expireation it was still listed and by then had some domain jacker's affiliate content on it.

One thing about the cnn listings is that many of the pages listed had their content moved.

[mopacfan]

I had to do a lot of work with dmoz to get an old site that had been domain-jacked, removed from the directory. I didn't want the new 'owner' getting any benefit of my hard work.

I became an editor of my category as well to help build it up. I just have not been able to find a great many sites to add and the submissions total about seven or eight a year. (small category) Other than that, I don't have anything to do w/ them. I don't want to green bust, I don't want more categories. What I've got going on is just fine for me.