Multiple DMOZ listings

what is the score with having the same site listed twice in DMOZ in different categories?

I am guessing it is helpful, but is it ok to submit a site to another category when it is already listed?

cheers

chris

 

There are plenty of sites with hundreds of DMOZ listings.

If you try to do it, you'll likely be labeled a spammer and have both entries deleted.

But realistically, Google seems to enforce a "one site; one vote". Two links from one site really isn't better than one link from that site. Therefore, getting more than one DMOZ link doesn't have much value.

 

Yup. All the editor's sites

 

Back when Resource Zone was still sort of functioning, I asked the same question, and got the response that an editor will sometimes add a site to multiple categories if he/she thinks the site rates several listings.

 

Check out DMOZ Top Listed Domains.

Here are the top 10:

 

Yeah its amazing that some of the editors have several listings but god help you if you are duplicated, even if an editor did it. I had my site yanked because of a "duplicate" listing, even though it was an editor that did it! The editor who put it there no longer is an editor, but what a mess. My site is relisted now but I had to go through hell to get it done.

 

The general belief/conclusion is "no, you can only submit to one category", but see other DMOZ threads here at D-P... the editors themselves seem to be confused about this.

 

I have a site that is listed at least three times and I never submitted it.

 

Chris,

You asked:

In general, no, but there are some exceptions. Sorry if this has caused some confusion. The actual procedure the ODP request for submissions is actually complicated, and some editors who may not have as broad a view of the directory, see only their parts.

A few weeks ago, I posted a fairly long article about it, trying to describe it in detail, in the Resource Zone. Let me see if I can provide a link to it... http://resource-zone.com/forum/showpost.php?p=189526&postcount=4 (it's long and complicated, but if you want the full answer, this is it, I believe)

That is about as full an answer as I have found anywhere.

But in most people's cases, where there is a site which is only in English, isn't aimed specifically at Kids, and doesn't have the address of the business on it (or some other obvious regional siginificance), the rule is "one submission to the best category". For all the other exceptions, see the article I wrote in the link...

And one last comment, repeated from that article - please do not confuse submissions with listings. There are many sites listed who never ever submitted, and there are a few sites (the list above shows a lot of them) that editors have chosen to list more than once.

Hope this helps clear up some confusion. I am sure that another ODP editor will correct me if I am on the wrong track, here.

 

Care to explain any of these Alucard?

libraryreference.org – 20 listings in DMOZ
www.ericdigests.org – 59 listings in DMOZ
www.historyofnations.net – 28 listings in DMOZ
http://www.libraryinstruction.com – 24 listings in DMOZ
http://lorenzen.blogspot.com – 3 listings in DMOZ
www.michaellorenzen.com – 11 listings in DMOZ

 

Or from Will.Spencer's post above, http://www.whois.sc/internet-statistics/dmoz-listings.html -- even given the type and stature of some of those top listings, the huge numbers seem a bit out of line.

DigitalPoint has 12 DMOZ listings: http://www.whois.sc/dmoz/digitalpoint.com

 

Not being a mind-reader, I can't assume to know the thought-processes that went on with the editor(s) that listed these sites. So no, I can't explain them.

One of two situations explain it:
Either the editor(s) who listed the sites felt that they were a good resource in each of the categories, or it is editorial abuse. As these sites have been posted in this forum before, you can assume that it has been brought to the attention of people who will investigate it.

And that, I'm afraid, is all I am allowed to say on this. Probably not what you wanted to hear, I can imagine.

 

So I guess it's not just sites that suck up to DMOZ that get listings or even multiple listings.... cos you guys do not suck up, but call things the way you see them.

 

I guess that was my point, Alucard.

You know I'm not a fan of DMOZ. It does seem more than passing strange to me that many of those with multiple site listings are editors or former editors (I just came across an SEO forum -- owned by a former editor who I won't name -- with three listings: one for the forum itself and two for non-unique articles attached to the forum). It also baffles me that some sites have numbers in 3 and 4 figures for DMOZ listings.

Having said that, I do see some sites with multiple listings that deserve more than one, anyway (perhaps not more than 2 or 3). The problem is that there are a lot of other sites (not even including my own) that I would see as deserving of the same treatment.

And that, in the end, is a big part of the problem -- the inequities. Call it corruption or call it subjectivity -- it's still inequitable.

 

I'm not even sure that I am opposed in inequity. Long ago, I came to accept that life was not fair.

DMOZ's organizational failure is the secrecy which breeds and nurtures incompetence and arbitrary subjectivity.

Compare the failing DMOZ with the thriving Wikipedia. Wikipedia has External Links. However, each Wikipedia page is team-edited in an open environment where the discussion occurs in the light-of-day.

 

Most of those sites look like isps and edu domains. This means many of them are unique urls/sites even though they all share the same parent domain.

 

That's largely true for the first page or so of the list Will found, but (1) why so many? and (2) what about these? (randomly selected from portions of the list from Will's URL)

And these?

 

Jim Noble investigated this and said "I've looked at your allegations in line with our standards and requirements and I don't see any sign of abuse" ??? I guess eaither Jim is associated with the site or another meta editor owns it and he is scared to remove the links.

 

Or he feels that the site really does deserve the number of listings that it has (and my guess is that that is what he meant if he told you that).

I am not going to get into debates about specific sites, whether they are owned by editors, members of DigitalPoint forum or other, I'm afraid. I can give general knowledge and advice, but that is it.

There are certain areas of the ODP where so-called "deeplinks" are very much the rules. Two examples of that are recipes and news articles. Whether you think that is right or wrong is of course open to debate (and it has been debated both in public and in the editorial community on many occasions), but the editors have decided to do it the way they do.

So it's worth looking a little beyond the raw numbers - look to see if the URL is a hosting service, like Geocities, etc - obviously those are not just deeplinks of a business. Look at the places the muliple listings are located in the ODP category - is this a place where such individual pages tend to get listed?

I'm not going to insult you by saying that everything that is multiply listed should be - the ODP is huge and we catch what we can, but obviously we miss some. But some are definitely done deliberately - no abuse, no editor self-interest.

ok, one discussion about a site for illustrative purposes.... I've heard the complaints about CNN.Com - that because AOL/TW owns them and the ODP that it's some big major conspiracy. The problem with that logic is that CNN.Com had lots of listings while the ODP was still owned just by Netscape, and had no affiliation with AOL/TW and therefore CNN.

All I would ask is that you be a little patient with blanket statistics - dig a little beneath the surface. If you find stuff that looks suspicious either put in an abuse report, or send it to an editor you trust to look into it. I have done this quite a few times. 0ften I am not at liberty to discuss the decision (which may feed the conspiracy theory and corrupt editor tag, I suppose), but if you trust either my integrity a little or those of other editors they will make a difference.

See, I don't have the time or the patience to go cruising around through the many thousand categories of the ODP looking for potential double-listings - I would rather spend my time processing update requests, reacting quickly to sites that people notify us have moved, etc, and listing new sites. Guide me to real issues that you see, and I will do what I can.

I am not atypical, either - there are quite a few editors I know who feel similarly to me.

 

Now we see what "YOURCHILDLEARNS" on DMOZ.