Dmoz?

[kc3]

I keep hearing about the DMOZ directory, well, the first time I ever even heard of it was on this website. So, I'm wondering how good is it? And is it any better than any other web directory?

[Josh]

Its THE internet directory ;)

Its mirrored across an array of other sites, so getting your site on that can _really_ help your PR and traffic.


Josh

[kc3]

Oh cool, good things I made a couple of submissions. How much food has it done for some of you?

[Josh]

Well, I cant say for my site.. since I am having a hard time being approved, I have no idea why.

Josh

[kc3]

Hm... How long does it usually take? It's taking a while for me.

[Josh]

I submited my site a month ago and its still not in :(

It takes a long time..

Josh

[Blogmaster]

depending on the categories it can take up to 2-3 months.

A friend of mine got his site in within 1 day!!!
But that was an off beat little category, nothing to do with webmaster stuff or game related sites which is so saturated and over-submitted.

[anthonycea]

I have heard that unless you are an editor or know one that they are so far behind and really don't care much, so you may never get in. :mad:

[kc3]

I applied to be an editor. Perhaps I can become one.

[Smyrl]

I have heard that unless you are an editor or know one that they are so far behind and really don't care much, so you may never get in. :mad:

Anthony, I think that is ole wive's tale 1001. I am a little ole lady nobody where it come to web development and contacts yet most of the sites I have submitted have been indexed and some quite rapidly.

Shannon

[kc3]

lol, perhaps google made it because they don't like DMOZ.

[anthonycea]

Smyrl, that is what I have heard, it depends on the editors and if they are doing their job and what the category is.

I guess they need more sites in the sections you are in and you have good editors in those sections that actually review sites and do their job.

[kc3]

Man, I wonder how long it will take. They have yet to email me anything except a confirmation email when I applied to be an editor.

[anthonycea]

Don't hold your breath waiting or bet your life on them :mad:

[kc3]

lol, I don't think I will.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

well i just had a look at dmoz (which hasn't got my site listed) although i have submitted it 5 months ago

....and i noticed....

"4 million sites listed" 66,000 editors

now unless i am mistaken...if each editor reviews 60 sites per year...that comes to about 4 million sites...what a lazy bunch of "empowered nerds" they are, that is truly pathetic... i mean PATHETIC !!!!
even i can manage to review more than 60 sites...in ONE SITTING !!!
This month alone i have added over 2000 links to my site
(which is huge ...so you will never find them ;) )
4 million links...with 60,000 editors...over how many years?? PATHETIC !!

absolutely PATHETIC !!!!! (get my point yet?)
someone here MUST be a DMOZ editor...what have you got to say about it??

G-E-M

[DarrenC]

Is it pathetic because your site is not listed? :D

[Infiniterb]

They aren't getting paid to do the work. It's volunteer. Most editors do great work when they first get into it, but over time they forget, get lazy, etc. If they were paid to do it (like the monkey's at yahoo) then you can bet they'd probably do a bit better job.

As to yahoo on the other hand, well, they are pretty pathetic. :)

[l234244]

I know it is frustrating the time it takes to get in but you have to remember 80% of the sites are submitted to the wrong category, given the wrong description, contain affiliate links, or are already listed which wastes most of the editors time. Plus keeping an eye on the listed sites for redirects, domain hijacking etc. If your site is listable then it will be done in due time.

[Birdie]

66,000 editors
That is the total number of editors ever had. Most are no longer editors, so your maths is very wrong.

DMOZ lists ~2000 new sites a day - no other directory comes remotely close to that.
DMOZ has almost 4.5 million sites listed - no other directory comes remotley close to that.
How is that PATHETIC - I think its an outstanding achievement.

What is pathetic is those that try to scam DMOZ .... hmmm - did you try that by submitting a mirror site??? .. LOL :)

[DarrenC]

LMFAO .. GEM, do you have an answer? :D

I've done my fair share of slagging off DMOZ for inserting my site to the wrong category, but the fact that no one searches DMOZ other than webmasters I've put it to the back of my mind..

More important things to worry about.

[Las Vegas Homes]

I heard a nice little bit of information today from the National Association of Realtors. Their attorneys are looking into the fact that the Dmoz directory is listing some real estate websites with the description as being a Realtor when some of these people are not and the term can not be used as a description.

This came from the admin from NAR for Trademark Infridgement. If this is true which I believe it is, DMOZ will have a whole lot of cleaning up to do within the directory. So this will increase wait times for new submissions.

[Birdie]

That will be interesting as DMOZ is not the "internet police". There was a thread at RZ a while ago to do with the listing of UK finance sites that did not have the appropriate government licence (there were lots of sites) - I can't find the thead, but my recollection was that the DMOZ editors had no way to verify licence status (or whatever its called)... ie they not the "internet police" and listed sites based on content

[Las Vegas Homes]

This is true they are not the internet police, but an editor that is editing a certain CAT needs to be aware of regulations pertaining to listings that may go in that CAT.

Real estate doesnt have a lot of regulations pertaining to websites other than those associated with the use of the word Realtor. If a Realtor was the editor for that CAT then I am sure that they would be aware of this, but most Realtors or real estate agents are not that web savvy.

[tvbuzz]

for getting into DMOZ -- I recommend submitting to your local area first .. for example .. if you are located in Ocala, Florida -- try submitting your site to that section first.

[Birdie]

but an editor that is editing a certain CAT needs to be aware of regulations pertaining to listings that may go in that CAT.
My recollection from the thread at RZ, was this was not the responsibility of a DMOZ editor.

[Las Vegas Homes]

My recollection from the thread at RZ, was this was not the responsibility of a DMOZ editor.

I dont know if it is or not, but one would think it should be IMHO for some CATS.

[DarrenC]

Non regulated UK Financial organisations is a very good example in which companies sell insurance to people when they are not accredited with the appropriate license from the financial bodies, for travel insurance this has caused no end of problems in recent years.

IMO DMOZ should not be listing sites that are not regulated, but then you could also say that about Google, MSN, Yahoo and every other directory and search engine in the World.

You can tell straight away if the site is regulated by the Financial body, but stopping these non regulated sites to get listed on Google, etc is near impossible, so I can understand DMOZ's stance on this one.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

DMOZ lists ~2000 new sites a day - no other directory comes remotely close to that.
Yep..PATHETIC...2000 sites added...out of 66,000 editors
(who probably joined just to list their OWN sites..and then went for a beer)
2000 from 66,000,,,thats about 3%....good job they ARE doing it for free...if it was a business they would be fired !!...thats about 64,000 people doing nothing !!
they should definately have a policy to add a certain amount of sites...or get booted from 'editorship'

...there's more DMOZ backlog the the NHS !....the sooner the search engines discount dmoz the sooner it will devolve into nothing..lets hope thats soon!
i rest my case

[DarrenC]

GEM, you sound bitter.

I wonder if you would feel the same if your site was submitted. Like Birdie mentioned, 66,000 editors and many of them will no longer be active, maybe if you paid them they would be able to get more active editors?

I've given my fair share of critism to DMOZ, and I think alot of it is warranted, but when people are working in their spare time, for free then we cannot be too critical of the editors.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

nah..i wouldn't be bitter over something so trivial...i no longer wish or expect my site to be listed as i have in excess of 400 affiliate programs to add ;)..which will all provide depth and choice to my users, and purchasing opportunities not found on other sites ~heaven forbid~!!!

paid or unpaid...is NOT the question ....does that sound Shakesperian?..the point is its a p*** poor performance by DMOZ
and shouldn't be '66,000 people working for free'...but 66,000 NOT WORKING AT ALL !!
the people who run dmoz couldn't pour p*ss out of a wellington if the instructions were on the heel !

;)

[kc3]

lol, your website looks like it makes money like mine. http://www.findmywebhost.org/

[Solicitors Mortgages]

it makes money indeed...and more to the point the visitors are rolling in..and so are the advertisers, with 18K pages now in google..its popping up all over the place

[Birdie]

but 66,000 NOT WORKING AT ALL
duh? - did you not read what I posted? DMOZ does not have 66 000 current editors!!!

BTW - most are busy people. Some are so busy, deleting all the spam and scams .... hint hint ? What about your submision of a mirror site??? Is that not PATHETIC?

Also, If I volunteer at a soup kitchen one day a month, am I being lazy if I do not volunteer two days a month? If a volunteer editor lists one site a month, are they being lazy for not listing two sites a month? - that one listing has increased the value of DMOZ - it has added value.

You have a very serious misunderstanding of what DMOZ is, how it works and volunteer systems.

You can keep being bitter and twisted, because *YOUR* site is not yet listed or is not listable and DMOZ will keep on being the biggest and fastest growing directory.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

<< What about your submision of a mirror site??? Is that not PATHETIC?>>

erm....i haven't got a mirror site.

<<You can keep being bitter and twisted, because *YOUR* site is not yet listed>>

I am not bitter<period>...... I just formed an opinion of DMOZ......and posted it here.
Its my personal opinion...and others can have their own :)
I respect your support for it....


with regards to <<deleting all the spam and scams .... hint hint ?>>
GET LOST !!...there's no spam.. scam ..pop-ups ..diallers..or anything untoward about my site...not even a mirror site,you plank !

[kc3]

it makes money indeed...and more to the point the visitors are rolling in..and so are the advertisers, with 18K pages now in google..its popping up all over the place

I know, I love the internet. FindMyWebHost.org is my first website meant for profit. I'm 17 and making a killing! I love the internet! lol

[Birdie]

erm....i haven't got a mirror site.

MIRRORS:
http://www.justoneuk.com/ & http://www.just1uk.com/

Thats called spam.
Google should soon get you for the duplicate content too....
GET LOST !!...there's no spam.. scam ..pop-ups ..diallers..or anything untoward about my site...not even a mirror site,you plank !
Really? 2 mirrors is spam!!! LOL

[Solicitors Mortgages]

that is NOT mirror sites...mirror sites are duplicate content sites with seperate ip's...hence MIRROR

are you suggesting that if you own widget.com and widget.co.uk
that you can only use one??? WRONG



RE:<<Thats called spam.>>
i think you need to review your concepts of spam.
the site is not spidered under/ or found in serp's or cache's for any other name apart from justoneuk<period>

[Solicitors Mortgages]

I know, I love the internet. FindMyWebHost.org is my first website meant for profit. I'm 17 and making a killing! I love the internet! lol

good for you,, we are slightly different in the fact that we are set up to offer cheap advertising services...and information thoughout the UK

..although unlike DMOZ, we are vigerously adding content to fill our 28K pages ;)

[Birdie]

i think you need to review your concepts of spam.
Really?

As far as DMOZ is concerned they are mirrors

You have the same content at both the URL's - that is what makes them mirrors - nothing to do with the ip address

Anyone can click on the two urls I listed above and see the duplicate mirrored content .... its not rocket science

[Solicitors Mortgages]

not a problem with me what DMOZ thinks...we don't do MIRRORS,or SPAM,or SCAM ..so DMOZ can see it how they want to.

....like i said..i am no longer interested in listing from DMOZ..and the sooner listings and SE results from it get devalued,,the BETTER
as i touched on previously,people only join to list their own sites....
what a waste of time.
I am sure some pretty commited individuals work their socks off for it (so dont get upset) but thats just a shame..i can understand why so many editors dont bother to do anything either..and i laugh at the fact that dmoz has to announce on their site how many editors they have that dont actually do anything !! one peep into dmoz forums and you can see how far up themselves most of the editors and moderators are.....too bad.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

actually i just had a look at

http://www.dmoz.org and http://www.dmoz.com
you are not suggesting that they are using mirrors are you??
surely that would mean they cannot list themselves?

just kidding...i will let you have the last laugh..post away

[kc3]

good for you,, we are slightly different in the fact that we are set up to offer cheap advertising services...and information thoughout the UK

..although unlike DMOZ, we are vigerously adding content to fill our 28K pages ;)

lol, yeah, though I do offer a service in which I help people who need a web host find what they're looking for.

[anthonycea]

CBP/Birdie, did you come here as a spy from WPW to ruin this forum like you did to WPW?

Why call one of our members sites spam, go back to WPW and moderate that forum into hell dude, don't come here and insult our members, go back and destroy that forum as you have been doing since you moderated over there.

Did they dump you and you have nothing better to do CBP?

What is your URL and why are you really here CBP/Birdie, members here really do not need your advice man.

Why don't you tell us a bit about your spam sites and URL's Birdie/CBP?

Why hide your sites from Digital Point members and come here just to spy and create bad blood as you do at WPW.

PS: CBP/Birdie is the worst moderator in the history of forums and he will deny that he is CBP the moderator and continue to insult members here for no real reason.

To bad Google does not remove you Birdie/CBP as I am sure you will snitch GEM out for what you call duplicate content.

This guy is a snake folks.

[anthonycea]

MIRRORS:
www.justoneuk.com & http://www.just1uk.com/

Thats called spam.
Google should soon get you for the duplicate content too....

Really? 2 mirrors is spam!!! LOL


See what a phony you are Birdie, when Zeezo had thousands of URL's with the same content on each site you defended Google leaving them in the index.

Now you come here you fraud and condemn one of our members for dup. content on 2 sites.

CBP/Birdie, go crawl back under the Google rock you came out from under you sick SOB.

[Birdie]

Who is CBP?

[anthonycea]

Why don't you tell us you phony?

What happened to your moderator job at WPW? Did they dump you because you are a loser.

What is your website URL, are you hiding it from us as you always have you fake?

[kc3]

There is nothing wrong with having two domains going to the same site! It's just to make it easier to find. heh, just1uk.com and justoneuk.com holy crap, what if someone told somebody justoneuk.com was a great site! And they wen to just1uk.com, wtf? It just makes it easier.

[anthonycea]

Don't worry about Birdie, he is a singing bird alright (a snitch) and the guy banned me about 5 times at WPW because I caught him in so many lies.

Plus he never won one debate and deleted so many threads that even the management of WPW must think the guy is insane.

Now he comes here to spread his venom on Digital Point members.

Go look at CBP at WPW, he was/is a moderator over there and never shows his URL, it is a secret.

The guy is the biggest phony on the forum circuit and hides behind fake user names and never tells anyone about any of his own sites but will condemn folks that contribute to forums as the "dumb judge of forum content".

Plus he is a crybaby and is wrong about 99% of the time.

[DarrenC]

Jaysus can't we have a adult discussion without the handbag fighting...

Birdie had some valid points, so did GEM, let's leave it at that.

[anthonycea]

You don't know Birdie like I do Jaysus, OK, I know his game and it is not a good one.

[minstrel]

I really don't know why people worry about DMOZ. As I've said many times, it's a doomed concept run by an inbred group of meta-editors who are legends in their own minds. There are a small number of decent and dedicated editors who mistakenly still believe in the ideal but they are soon disillusioned or run out. The oft-cited value of having the directory feeds mirrored every which way on the net and therefore a link counting as many is dubious now and will be even more so in the future. Once Google devalues it further, it will be only a footnote in the history of the web.

Save your breath arguing with the few remaining DMOZ fans and disgruntled editors and put that energy to better use developing and promoting your site in areas that actually have some ROI.

[Michael]

Save your breath arguing with the few remaining DMOZ fans and disgruntled editors and put that energy to better use developing and promoting your site in areas that actually have some ROI.I am a DMOZ fan for that very reason - ROI. It takes only two minutes to submit and then sometime in the following three weeks to three years a lot of non-reciprocated backlinks appear. The main categories will often produce thousands of them and I personally find that my DMOZ submissions provide the highest ROI of any off-page optimization activity.

- Michael

[anthonycea]

It is something that may be worthwhile, but as Minstrel mentions it is mismanaged, you can not get honest answers, it is known to be slower than molasses as far as getting responses from submissions.

In fact you may never even be considered or reviewed if the editors in your category are "busy or a competitor" that really does not "want" you in the directory.

So it is a bias process and I have heard that unless you kiss arse or know the editors in some way that you have little hope of getting a listing.

Some have good experiences with them, but most have made bad reports on them and have started their own directories because of this weakness.

[seodelhi]

Dmoz is like a lottery today, you need good fortune for your website to be accepted.

[barrow]

Top 5 Ways To Get Listed In Dmoz
by barrow

1. Date an editor
2. Kidnap an editor's loved one for ransom
3. Bribe an editor
4. Trick an editor to walk away from the computer while logged into dmoz
5. Become an editor


But seriously, getting listed in Dmoz requires two things: around 6 months spare time, and luck.

GOOD LUCK

[minstrel]

It takes only two minutes to submit and then sometime in the following three weeks to three years a lot of non-reciprocated backlinks appear.
Or never.

One thing most people don't understand is that if an editor decides the category has "enough" representative websites, yours is NEVER going to be added no matter how good it may be, not even if objectively it may be better than some of the others already in DMOZ, becaue it will be deemed "unnecessary".

[Michael]

Or never.

One thing most people don't understand is that if an editor decides the category has "enough" representative websites, yours is NEVER going to be added no matter how good it may be, not even if objectively it may be better than some of the others already in DMOZ, becaue it will be deemed "unnecessary".I have not experienced that and I have submitted a LOT of sites to many different categories. I have had only one site rejected and after adding more content (which was happening anyway) it was eventually accepted.

Even if half my sites were rejected submission would still provide a very good ROI.

- Michael

[minstrel]

I have not experienced that and I have submitted a LOT of sites to many different categories. I have had only one site rejected and after adding more content (which was happening anyway) it was eventually accepted.
I have not experienced it personally either. That doesn't alter the fact that it's true.

There are numerous problems with DMOZ. This is only one of them.

[Michael]

I have not experienced it personally either. That doesn't alter the fact that it's true.

There are numerous problems with DMOZ. This is only one of them.Just to be clear, I am not suggesting anything you said is incorrect or that DMOZ is fault free, only that I personally have had no real problems and benefited a lot out of the short time it takes to submit sites.

Out of interest what are the categories where the editors are not accepting any new sites because there are "enough representative websites"?

- Michael

[minstrel]

I don't have a list, Michael. But this has been stated more than once on more than one forum by various DMOZ editors as a justification for not adding new sites to categories which apparently haven't been updated in some time. I'm not a DMOZ editor and never have been, but I presume that the editors who have stated this would no reason to lie about it. I wouldn't be surprised if you can find some reference to it at the ironically named "Resource Zone" -- if not, I'm pretty sure you'll find it in one of the many DMOZ threads at WebProWorld.

[Michael]

OK I will take a look, thanks minstrel.

- Michael

[macdesign]

There is nothing in any editor guidelines that says to not accept sites when a category gets "full".

For example, I edit a sub-category of web-designers - it has hundreds of sites there - personally I don't think the category is that usefull to anyone [no ODP user goes through and tries to find web designers who's company starts with a particular letter], but if I get 500 more sites there I would go ahead and add them.

However, I could think of some examples where an editor might not add additional sites, since they would be redundant. There are a lot of sites around that list PHP commands, many of them are word for word copies of the same text [which is public domain]. There's no particular reason to have five different sites with the same content.

LIkewise forums - let's say a forum for a particular game. When the category starts up, an editor might add whatever sites he finds, just to have sites there. But as sites build up in the category, there is less reason to add forums with a small number of posts, they don't provide value in comparison to the other sites. Also the longer a forum has been around, the more posts it has, newly created forums become much harder to justify listing.

On the other hand if I had 300 sites selling pink diamonds, there is no reason to prevent more sites being added, since presumably they are different in price, shipping and the area of the world served.

[minstrel]

I don't think I ever claimed there was "a DMOZ rule". I did say that more than one editor has indicated that this is DMOZ practice, at least for them. In effect, that's as good as a rule.

On the other hand if I had 300 sites selling pink diamonds, there is no reason to prevent more sites being added, since presumably they are different in price, shipping and the area of the world served.
In theory, that may be true. Show me a category where it is true in practice. And we're not talking about mirrored sites so please don't drag that old herring up again.

[nevetS]

I'm waiting for going on a year for one site. Another of mine was added within a couple o' weeks. The site I've been waiting for a year doesn't have a clear cut category, so I suppose I'm out of luck in that department. It's been moved through 4 categories now, so people are working on it, they just don't want it in their categories :). The one it's in now is one of those big categories with a big waitlist so I think it's pretty hopeless.

I volunteered on three separate occassions only to get rejected and it's a bear to try and find a category that is small and I know a lot about. There are a few non-existant ones, but you can't volunteer to edit a category that isn't up yet :).

[macdesign]

Here is http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Designers/Basic_Service/S/

Over 700 sites there - and more keep getting added. [I don't edit that category]

The truth may be that editors just get bored of working in a category, and if I was editing web designers beginnning with S, I might just get tired of it after a while and quit the category, and maybe no-one would then want to take over that large a pile of sites. So it's not so much a rule as a side effect.