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

[Qryztufre]

Originally Posted by crowbar

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.

If I offer a bribe for someone else's site, that would be the 'facts as you see them' Then if you ban the site, then that in and of itself is speculation on the part of the editor, and a definite flaw within the system.

I thought there was someone saying they had tools to find out, looks like the only tool that is really used is a blinkable eyelash...

[compostannie]

Originally Posted by crowbar

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

de ja vu... woah! I thought you said it was only bad if the fox had a chicken in his mouth while on his way to rob a bank. Oh well.

Crowbar, do you hate all canines or just foxes? Would you also bash a dog, wolf or coyote for eating. The fox is what he is, as God made him. Would you kick a puppy for being a puppy?

[robjones]

The fox is what he is, as God made him.

**rob blushes **

Gosh, and I thought you hadn't noticed.


ROFL. Hey, the Malamute I gave TheBride recently looks like a grown up Max. Pretty pup.

[crowbar]

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?

Any editor, even new editors, can list their own site in the category that they edit, if it belongs there, and they treat it as impartially as they treat every other site there.

If they don't edit the category it belongs in, then they are free to submit it to that category, where it will wait right along with every other site suggestion there for an editor to review it.

That's a very good question, gworld, and the best answer I can give is that I would hope that any editor who lists his or her own site, and isn't sure if it qualifies to be listed in a certain category, would ask for second opinions.

As there is never any one category in the Directory that is "owned" by one specific editor, and there are at least 200-300 other editors who can and do edit there, at different times, the likelyhood of a misplaced site not being spotted by one of them, or even by the public, is pretty slim I think.

By the way, as you know, many editors are webmasters themselves, at every level, and some are SEOs, and others are computer geeks, . It's part of the trust thing, you know?

Hi, Annie, .

[gworld]

Originally Posted by crowbar

.

By the way, as you know, many editors are webmasters themselves, at every level, and some are SEOs, and others are computer geeks, . It's part of the trust thing, you know?

Looking at all the links selling, pharmacy, gambling, one page doorway pages to porn affiliates, I have a very hard time with trust thing, you know?

An organization should work based on procedures with proper control and checks; only crooks like the trust thing because it makes it possible for them to be corrupt.

[Ivan Bajlo]

Originally Posted by crowbar

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

Maybe I give it a chicken?

Just look at that cute face, who wouldn't give it a chicken?



http://www.naturephotographers.net/kac1101-1.html

Or this Filipino fox.

[Goddess]

Didn't really understand your comment...my duh, no doubt.

What makes a term completive? Dictionary says "whole, complete, entire" but none of those suggest the possible spirit of the word when used in context of search terms. The most inclusive?

[QUOTE=nebuchadrezzar;4340336]
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.

[compostannie]

Hi crowbar!

Originally Posted by Ivan Bajlo

Maybe I give it a chicken?

Just look at that cute face, who wouldn't give it a chicken?

I agree, I'd give that sweetie a chicken! I think the most important thing to remember here is that K9 Americans are people too! Lets be nice to them.

So Rob you have a Malamute, eh? (now I like you even more) Beautiful breed, got any pictures?

The on topic part -> dmoz.org will never be a bad neighborhood. This discussion is silly.

[gworld]

Originally Posted by compostannie

The on topic part -> dmoz.org will never be a bad neighborhood.

How about the "senior" editors?

[t2000q]

it is just another goal to shoot for like getting a high PR,even though it does not really mean much

[Anonymously]

Originally Posted by compostannie

I agree, I'd give that sweetie a chicken!

Now I feel sorry for the chichen

The on topic part -> dmoz.org will never be a bad neighborhood. This discussion is silly.

Spot on, especially the second part

[MrS]

Dmoz is a goo SEO but it has a lot of bad reviewers because of that i thnk it's very hard to submit your url in the right category, so sometimes people email the reviewer and offers him $$$ for inclusion and it's working, that;s bad

[Anonymously]

Please offer evidence of your statement, otherwise it is only innuendo. If we do have a corrupt editor we want to know and sort it out. Remember even attempting to bribe an editor gets a site banned for ever.

[crowbar]

I agree with Anonymously. It really isn't fair to besmirch all of the editors who are honest and giving their free time for the benefit of others. All of us are just normal people who could be one of your neighbors, we've just chosen to volunteer our time for the Directory, rather than the Red Cross or the Boy Scouts.

[Ivan Bajlo]

Originally Posted by crowbar

I agree with Anonymously. It really isn't fair to besmirch all of the editors who are honest and giving their free time for the benefit of others.

I agree it isn't fair to honest editors most of whom either quit or got removed by oligarchs.

Originally Posted by crowbar

All of us are just normal people who could be one of your neighbors, we've just chosen to volunteer our time for the Directory, rather than the Red Cross or the Boy Scouts.

Red Cross = DMOZ??? Darn so my 3000 wiki edits changed the World and helped save lives...

[crowbar]

Darn so my 3000 wiki edits changed the World and helped save lives

Always nice to see anyone giving freely of their time to benefit others, Ivan, no matter where it is. I'm sure someone needing that info will really appreciate it. I use Wiki quite often, so thank you for your efforts, .

[sweetfunny]

Its a shame DMOZ is in such a bad way, it has the potential to be a good resource.. I wouldnt use it to browse for sites as the listings are very poor quality.

[crowbar]

On the other hand, when I've tried looking for something using a search engine, I might see the same site listed in the first 5 slots, which is kind of irritating, .

And, it's not real comforting to think you're search results are more relative to who the highest bidder or the best SEO is, than what your actually searching for.

I don't think you'd see that in the Directory.

Of course, I'm not an SEO or webmaster, so I really don't understand anything about those things, and there are huge sections of the Directory I've never visited, so I can't say you're wrong either. I'm sorry you have such a poor opinion of our work though, .

[Qryztufre]

Originally Posted by crowbar

On the other hand, when I've tried looking for something using a search engine, I might see the same site listed in the first 5 slots, which is kind of irritating, .

Search engines, with Google in the lead, are now pushing aside links from the same site and placing them in supplemental results. This leads to more relevant sites making it to the first page of a search. DMOZ on the other hand, does do something similar. If I am looking through an area, I can find the same site listed multiple times in multiple categories...and while there may be only one per category, in many cases I only need to see the site once.

For instance, Topix would be a prime candidate for a top listing in regional news rather then being spread out in each place it discusses.

I have a forum with a wide range of discussion, but it only has one listing, and that's at the very bottom. Why? Because overall, that is the best place for it...but I do have topics ranging several categories, so in a way, I could get a listing in each...though, oddly enough that is not the standard procedure of things.

And, it's not real comforting to think you're search results are more relative to who the highest bidder or the best SEO is, than what your actually searching for.

And again, back to Topix, that is a site originally affiliated with a still active Admin of DMOZ. It is not fair that his site should be listed time and time again simply because he is an admin, or even an editor of the directory. So in a matter of speaking, DMOZ suffers from similar instances.

Of course, I'm not an SEO or webmaster, so I really don't understand anything about those things, and there are huge sections of the Directory I've never visited, so I can't say you're wrong either. I'm sorry you have such a poor opinion of our work though, .

I am not all that much of an SEO, but I do have opinions on the matter, and I'm not much of a webmaster, even though I do own a few sites. I've not been to all the places within the directory either, but I do know that some spots are wonderful resources...but I also know that there are some places that just seem out of place when making claims of how great the project is. It is these places that are dragging down the ODP, and seemingly the powers that be do not seem to mind all that much, which does lead to a little negative speculation on those from the outside (and a few on the inside).

On the whole I do think that DMOZ is a good resource, though it does have it's part which could make the entire thing crumble into a "bad neighbor", and while the pure calculations of search engines have their flaws as well, at least they get the excuse of being robots. DMOZ has no such luxury, as it's "human edited" which means any bad parts are the fault of the "humans" that maintain it.

[crowbar]

I've heard Topix mentioned before, but, I'm not familiar with it, so I can't comment about it. If there is an admin involved, then it's way out of my league, that would be a matter for staff.

Thanks for the info on search engines, I didn't know that.

I'm sure there are parts of the Directory that need a lot more attention than they've gotten, but, you need to have volunteer editors who have an interest in working in those areas.

Of course, I'm not a fisherman, but I am helping out by listing fishing charter boat sites from all over the world. I'm unfamiliar with the terminology, so it's slow work for me, I'm afraid, but I'm learning as I go and it's an area that needs fixing.

With roughly around 600,000 categories and roughly 7,000 active editors, it can take awhile to get to everything, .