Is DMOZ still a good SEO option, or will it someday soon be a "Bad Neighborhood"?

With all of the crazy stories about purchased links, corrupt editors, and the huge delays in adding sites with no explanation, it seems DMOZ is on it's way to becoming more of a "bad neighborhood" than a trusted directory of websites. Of course, almost every SEO guide in the world suggests submission to DMOZ, but is that really a good idea anymore? I'm starting to think it's not worth the headache to get your site accepted, and it probably won't hold any weight at all in a few years. Anyone agree or disagree?

 

It wont do you any harm. Even if it becomes the worst site in the world it won't be able to harm you, It's only bad to link to bad neighbourhoods, Getting links from them has no negative effect.

DMOZ never has had much effect SEO wise. it's just a link. Submit your site and forget about it.

 

That's pretty much what I did with it, but I run into the site every now again - and I see that my link is not included still - I just am realizing that it's probably not worth the extra effort to continue to submit and re-check every few months.

 

I am no expert on SEO, and I really don't want to be saying that you all should be submitting your sites to the ODP for SEO reasons. That would be a really bad idea. Don’t submit your site, you will just get all hot and bothered. But since we have gone from suggestions that the directory means virtually nothing in determining relevancy in search engines to this really silly idea that google might view the ODP as a "bad neighborhood" we need to inject as little bit of reality.

Research I have seen recently shows that there is a clear statistical correlation between relevancy in searches and a site being listed in the ODP for moderately completive search terms. It is a little difficult to demonstrate here but take a look at this. Bear in mind that these results are distorted by the inclusion of big sites like Wikipedia, it does wierd things with some domain extensions and that nothing is perfect. I have chosen the terms for some of the topics that some of the members I have shared such charming exchanges with have an interest in.

http://www.seocompany.ca/tool/top-keyword/?keyword=psychology 9/10
http://www.seocompany.ca/tool/top-keyword/?keyword=Occult 8/10
http://www.seocompany.ca/tool/top-keyword/?keyword=Croatia 10/10
http://www.seocompany.ca/tool/top-keyword/?keyword=Atheist 10/10

It certainly would seem to scratch the "bad neighborhood idea".

It also makes the "gosh it’s just a link from another site" look a bit shaky”. One explanation could be that the ODP is good at mirroring goggles relevancy, which may be the case. However that is not what one would expect for "dinosaur" that can't keep up with the growth of the web as we are told so often.

 

Ya know, I'm not really an SEO expert as well, but the only thing those lists really say to me is that Wikipedia gets added to the list with 10k ++ entries in DMOZ. Which in turn makes me say once more, bigger is not always better, especially when it's packed full of the same sites time and time again.

CNN, Topix, Wiki, what else is worthy of 10k listings? If you dropped all those 10k++ sites down to only one listing each, how much lower would the 4,830,584 bragging rights be?

Though I can see from the list that list http://dir.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Religion_and_Spirituality/Faiths_and_Practices/Occult/ would be a key place to get a few of my sites listed as it made it to the top 10 list (and yahoo.com made it to the 10k++ listings on the ODP)

 

Yes there is also a correlation with Yahoo as well however it is weaker with some of theses terms. You would have worked out that the yahoo directory link is not working on these results. Occult100.com is the second result and is not in the yahoo directory. One explanation is that top lists tend to be marketed in a viral way with lots of links form lots of sites, and google would normally flag the way these links have been obtained as suspect, however because it is listed in a trusted site (trustrank seed lists and all that) then the flag is removed. Or so it has been postulated by some.

 

Seems you can be right...
Few weeks ago my developer over 3-years PR5 domain listed in DMOZ from 3 years went to google sandbox... You won't find it in SERPS on any related keyword (or has last positions). Didn't make any bad SEO. Clear w3c valid site.
That's really makes me mad.

 

If the site is over 3 years old you are not in the sandbox. See /http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=71522 for an explanation of what the sandbox is

If its a directory that you are talking about, google is weeding out directories that smell of pay for inclusion. Perhaps you have been caught up in that. You should consider the advice that the website in your sig offers

before coming up will silly theories like this.

 

Did you link back to DMOZ? As getting a link from there likely should not hurt (not even to send one to the sandbox) The only way it would or could have really harmed was if you'd have linked to such a bad neighbor. For proof, look at the post above mine. It's an Editor stating that google is starting to weed out all the paid directories *smirk*

 

I'm afraid you missed my point.
Mentioned site was never selling and never bying links.
Also who can know better latest directories rumours if not me

It's a developer site, so most of links come from downloads archives, computer magazines (have many awards).
Also many links come from forums or related websites.

Whatever you call it - sandbox or a filter - the site is not available in SERPS on any keyword no more - though used to be in TOP3 on most.

Sorry: it is available - on last 10 positions for some millions.

Still no1 on domain name, still indexed on 'site' command. But for lat 20 days not cached.

Didn't find useful or helpful the thread you call.
Have my own Google Sandbox explanation


Some can find it helpful.
Still not for me

 

MMM
Not so sure.
A ggod link from DMOZ is hard to beat with good anchor on a good page, especially the older ones

 

Well said.

 

I agree. As an ODP editor, my view is that there are two sides to the Directory, one is what might be considered the supply side (webmasters/site owners/SEO) and the other side being the end users (web surfers looking for specific information on a Topic or Area).

We disagree about which side is more important and who the Directory should serve.

Webmasters/site owners/SEO can only see the Directory from their perspective and what their own personal needs and desires are.

Editors in the Directory are working at the other side, we serve the web surfers themselves. The two are not compatible because each has a different purpose and goal.

We allow the public to send us site suggestions to help us in our goal to serve the web surfers, but it is not our only source of supply, or even our most important one. (though we do appreciate it)

Where the misunderstandings come in, is the misconception that the Directory is a listing service in existance to serve the webmasters/site owners/SEO community or that it should be. As much as you might desire that, it just ain't so.

Speaking only for myself, as an editor and not official ODP staff, most of us are very aware of this misunderstanding and do empathize with you. I recognize that there is an honest, legitimate industry of webmasters/seo folk out there whose living depends on how successful they are, but we're working at opposite ends of the Directory.

Hopefully, we'll someday figure out a way to come together and engage this supply industry for the betterment of everyone, while still maintaining the integrity of the Directory and our own goals of serving the web surfer.

In the mean time, the best way to help yourselves get a possible listing is to become very familiar with our editing guidelines, write an ODP compliant Title and Description, send it to the correct category, and then suggest and forget about it.
http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/

We spend a great deal of our time sending misplaced sites to the correct category and rewriting Titles/Descriptions. If you could do that work for us, before you make the suggestion, it would speed up the time it takes to get a possible listing tremendously and be very appreciated by all of us.

When I see something in the description box that reads, "We have the best prices in town!" , and a list of keywords, my heart just sinks and I move on to the next site suggestion. That one can just sit there. If they can't be bothered, why should I?

 

If you have submitted since Christmas (all submitted sites lost late last year), then the site is in a queue or it is not compliant with our guidelines. Re-submitting will do you no favours if you have submitted since Christmas 06. If its in a queue it will go to the bottom of it if you submit again, if its been booted out re-submitting will not gain it entry.

So either way follow Crowbar's advice and as he says forget it. Getting a headache about it will only give you a headache and will not gain or speed-up entry into the ODP. And to say this again, don't believe there are any shortcuts or that you can bribe your way in. Bribing or attempting to bribe an editor just gets one banned for life. (NB if anyone has any concrete information that helps us find corruption then there are places, including on here to report that and believe me it will be throughly investigated, whatever you might read here!)

 

In six years, I've been offered 3 bribes. All 3 were banned in the blink of an eyelash. And, I suspect, from what one of them said, they got the idea from what they read on a webmaster forum, unfortunately.

 

Blink of an eyelash? In other words you have done zero investigation to see if these attempts were real or attempts to red tag competitors - successfully I would say.

I'm sensing new wave of bribery attempts coming, psst I got this link cnn.com...

 

If the fox is standing there with a chicken in his mouth, how much investigation is needed?

 

But what if it's not one of your chickens the fox has in it's mouth?

I'd like to pay to get a few more of my topix listings added. What would the price for that be?

 

What if I'm really an astronaut? I can only deal with actual facts as I know them, not speculation, and some things are way over my paygrade. I'm just a simple editor giving personal opinion about things I do know.

 

What side are the "senior" editors? It is obvious that they have their own COMMERCIAL web sites. By listing their own sites, are they serving the webmasters that they are or the end users?