DMOZ is dead or is it? Please post if you got approved lately!

I wonder if DMOZ is still quality one. I have one of my friend as an DMOZ editor. I won't disclose on the category he moderate and who he is. He has 3 things to do

1. Get his site being listed
2. Get his friend's site being listed without a time
3. Ask for someone to pay him if he want to have his website being listed in DMOZ. He has done it in personal so it is hard to be detected.

Many editors are ethical but some of them are not. DMOZ is corrupted for a while and I wonder if Google still consider DMOZ as an important source. I bet some competitive category will not accept new moderator not because the slot is full, but they just reserve the slot for their own friends, to have only their sites being listed regardless to the site quality, and abused the power of DMOZ. If Google still respect to DMOZ I think they should fire all moderators and pick some trusted Google staff to take care of it.

 

And such a person you call "friend".
I would report him without hesitation and end our friendship.
These are not the people we need on the world.

> If Google still respect to DMOZ I think they should fire all moderators and pick some trusted Google staff to take care of it.
That will be difficult for Google to do as they do not own DMOZ and have no control at all over who is or can become an editor.

 

Certain things on DMOZ are updated faster than others, especially the localized areas, even more so especially if there is a larger population in the area, there will be more editors.

 

Indeed.

I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion, but it is completely untrue. Not to mention the fact that the number of named editors in any area has absolutely nothing to do with how much activity there is, let alone how much time might be spent of reviewing suggestions.
I'm afraid there is simply no way at all of predicting who might look at a site, where they might find it, what they might do as a result, or when they might do it.
This applies inside DMOZ just the same as it does all over the internet!

 

interesting.

i must admit that my first thought when i saw the title of this thread was "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" - to quote mark twain.

dmoz will be around for a long while I am sure...it's still quite useful and carries weight

 

I am so sorry that i have submited my request months ago, but never get any response! May be my site will never be approved!

 

In this case you have to report the majority of senior editors in DMOZ.

 

Well i have been an editor in DMOZ for about 13 months. In this time i have done about 9000 edits and added around 5000 sites, of which probably only 1000 came from the suggestion pool. The rest, well i found them by various methods, surfing, local papers, customers i deal with on a day to day basis.

So there are probably 5000 people that are very happy at being included, but in reality, many would not even realise or be aware that their site has been included

The difference is the webmasters that come here hoping for a listing, the majority of times for sites that do not meet the guidelines. They tend to be very vocal about DMOZ, voice opinions when they arent included and as such, visitors to this forum are always reading the negatives.

When you take the "big picture" into account, hundreds or sites are included on a daily basis. Far from being dead, it is active, strong and a great resource.

 

i agree; just look at the sites in the signatures of those doing the whining.

gworld - we still waiting for you to back up your claim of all the crap sites owned by editors that are listed. Can you provide links to all those sites please.

 

Oh come on now, be fair. He thoughtfully confined his accusations to "senior" editors, so we are waiting for a list of "only" those sites owned and inappropriately listed by, what, meta-editors and Admins? Or is it just Admins? No, surely not. Perhaps his list includes catmods' sites as well? Maybe kmetas' ones too?

As he wastes no opportunity to attack and insult as many volunteers as possible, I guess he could be including editalls as well, maybe keditalls and cateditalls.

Wherever he draws his line about "seniority", it will certainly be a revelation. Everyone please bring a chair and your own drinks. I'll provide some snacks, and gworld has promised the entertainment.

 

I say let it die I have been waiting well over six months for acceptance without approval. Just a little irritating, I mean sure they have PR 8, but I have been accepted into plenty of manual reviewed PR 6 and 7 directories. Sorry they are just frustrating.

 

Well yes, it must be very frustrating to realise that DMOZ is not a listing service, and to learn that editors are not required to review site suggestions at all, let alone in any specific time frame.
But fortunately there are many other directories which do offer this service, so perhaps your frustration would be less if you looked at them instead?

 

Another DMOZ editor who was first pretending he doesn't know anything about DMOZ.

Just read the threads started by me in this forum section like "fun with DMOZ" or threads about the sites which are owned by phonemistress and her friendly meta.

Actually DMOZ is a listing service as long as you pay the listing fee of about 100 dollars through different free lance sites.

 

1. I am NOT and NEVER have been a DMOZ editor. You made that up.
2. You made a claim; I simply asked that you back it up; why are you avoiding doing so? Are you making that up as well?

Come up with the goods.

 

No thanks, I'd much rather spend my time doing something useful.
But you said very clearly that you knew of lots of sites that were owned by "senior editors" which they had listed against ODP guidelines, so we are all waiting to see you name some of them. Referring us back to previous nebulous and unsubstantiated allegations is a pointless delaying tactic.
You've made a claim many times over and now you are being asked to provide your evidence. The more you duck and dive the more it looks like you haven't actually got any.
We are waiting. *starts slow hand clap*

 

Personally, I think Wikipedia has succeeded where DMOZ has failed over the years.

My $0.02 ...

Rob

 

huh? Wikipedia is not a directory. You are trying to compare apples to oranges.

gworld - where have you gone? We still waiting for you to come up with the goods to support your claims.

 

I have shown the goods to support my claims and I told you how to search this forum to find it. If you are too lazy or delibertly blind like makrhod, it can not be my fault.

 

LOL.

Look at posting history of Agent000 from his first post that he wants to learn about DMOZ to knowing everything about ODP and how it works.

You are right, you are not an editor, just professional defender of DMOZ.

Is it possible that Agent000 is just another account for Anonymously, jimnoble or pagoda since we all know how much DMOZ senior editors like multiple identities in their pursuit of sweeping the dirt under the carpet?

 

You claimed that senior editors listed their own crappy websites. I and others have asked you several times to post some links to these crappy sites. You have repeatedly avoided providing this.

This time you avoided it by calling me of being lazy etc. Well, I have searched your previous posts and I can not see were you have already posted the links to crappy sites that are owned by senior editors.

Please provide us the links to these crappy sites that you claimed are owned by editors. Please come up with the goods.

Your credibility is taking another nose dive over this one. Stop skirting around the direct requests to back up your claims. Provide the links to these sites.

You already lied by claiming I was an editor when I am not. Are you being untruthful about this claim as well?