1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

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

Discussion in 'ODP / DMOZ' started by venetsian, May 4, 2009.

  1. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #101
    I think the biggest problem is that we are not what you want us to be, a listing service. :)

    For someone who thinks so little of the Directory and its unpaid volunteer community of editors, you sure do get yourself worked up pretty good. That kind of stress isn't good for the old heart you know. :)
     
    crowbar, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  2. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #102
    Nah, you just don't want to open your eyes.

    Let me be clear:

    In the music and audio> converters, per example.

    For some strange reason, DMOZ only points to 10 links.
    BUT 2 of that 10 are spamming, since both are a trick to point to the same
    AND others are WRONG.
    One point to a malware site.
    Other MUSIC AND AUDIO> CONVERTERS point to a UNIT converter (miles, kilometers, etc). :eek:
    Etc, etc.

    There is NO way to defend that. No way.
    No way to say "DMOZ list few sites because is concerned about quality" (quality is linking malware related, spammy and non related stuff under AUDIO>CONVERTERS????)

    Its a crappy directory, don't came here trying to hidde HUGH tricks, spams, mistakes, etc. talking about "the way we want to be".

    At least 4 of the only 10 listed sites are, in some way or another, CRAP or SPAM.

    Don't try to cheat us with the language tellings us that it is the way DMOZ should be, PLEASE!

    Why do you think that people just forget about DMOZ?

    Because, no matter your explanations, if some people are searching for audio converters, they want to find there at least the most well known, and not only editor's own sites and the rest is non related crap links.

    DMOZ is useless for people searching for something.
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  3. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #103
    Ah, i saw that no matter you said here that everything is fine, you just go to change the things i im poiting in DMOZ.
    Mmm... don't talk very good about you.
    If its a failure, like it is, recognize it here. Don't just go to quickly delete there, at the same time you said here that everything is fine.

    Very very bad.

    But you will have to be day and night making changes :p

    Here is another horrible problem (you may explain us that its because DMOZ are concerned a lot about quality! he he)

    [​IMG]

    Unless you say here that its because DMOZ is much concerned about quality and decide to list in music playes another unit measurement software :eek:
    You can go and change it (if you want, don't recognize here nothing, but correct it please :) )
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  4. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #104
    I don't edit in that part of the Directory, so if changes were made, they were made by another editor. Probably by one of our metas. :D

    I would think you would be happy to see something you were complaining about corrected, and I'm certainly happy for you myself. ;)
     
    crowbar, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  5. [RusTy]

    [RusTy] Peon

    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #105
    i'm sure it will be sorted in few days
     
    [RusTy], Jun 3, 2009 IP
  6. crowbar

    crowbar Peon

    Messages:
    897
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #106
    Well, if it does, credit will have to be given to yenerich for bringing attention to it. :)
     
    crowbar, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  7. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #107
    My main wish (in this matter) is that DMOZ people understand the BIG mistake they are making:

    1.- Thinking that editors can do whatever they want
    2.- Thinking that its not a "submit site". Because what people wants is that DMOZ has as most possible websites listed (only avoiding spam). No place to personal 'point of views'.
    3.- Letting editors reject thousands of competitors sites, based on bla bla bla philosophies. that only hides wrong things behind.

    The day they understand that and start listing the sites submited with no strange excuses, DMOZ will get respect again and traffic too. DMOZ is one of the websites with badest reputation on the web. Even doing things well, it will be hard to change that. They need a big change NOW,
    Otherwise, its dead.
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  8. makrhod

    makrhod Peon

    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    29
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #108
    Sigh.
    It is not DMOZ which is making a mistake and refusing to accept the truth.
    The directory and its volunteer editors follow the public guidelines which are easy for everyone to read.

    The fact that many webmasters keep wishing and demanding that DMOZ becomes something different is not only sad, but completely pointless.

    There are many other directories which fulfil the criteria you seek, so why not use them, rather than trying to blame us for not being what you want?
     
    makrhod, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  9. SEO_Michael

    SEO_Michael Peon

    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #109
    DMOZ is a lost cause IMO. Actually, directories as a whole are. Who even uses them anymore except for SEO?
     
    SEO_Michael, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  10. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #110
    Where in public guidelines says that senior editors should multiple affiliate doorway pages for their sites, sell listings and abuse the directory? :rolleyes:
     
    gworld, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  11. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #111
    Why is it OK for editors to say I was only an editor to list my own site, which I did not treat differently then any other site I listed, but OK for other editors to have multiple listings?

    The Double Standard IS standard within the ODP.
     
    Qryztufre, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  12. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #112

    Explain me EXACTLY which guidelines support that for MANY years in the music>converters or music>players where THAT bad please.
    (Read the lasts posts).

    Please don't use excuses to justify what is BAD with no discussion.

    And i only point that BIG mistakes and un-ethic stuff, because i don't have the time to analize more categories. But most of DMOZ are like the things i showed here.

    Tell me which guideline explain why in music>players is listed something that is a metric converter and that has NOTHING to do with music or players?

    That is what DMOZ people never answer and start hidding that behind false discussion on "being what they want to be"... DMOZ want to be a directory with that kind of mistakes and bad behavior of editors?

    If the answer is NO, then stop using answer that DO NOT answer the problem please.

    Its MY mistake complaining about things like the one i complain in this thread??????:eek:

    Wow, DMOZ people are really blind about this points.
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  13. Caesar1

    Caesar1 Peon

    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    25
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #113
    To tell you the truth, I really don't care what other editors do with the sections they edit, its not my job to watch over them. I can add my site to other categories and be within the guidelines of DMOZ but being an editor, I think one link is enough.
     
    Caesar1, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  14. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #114
    One fo the main problems about DMOZ is this one:

    What the webmaster find is NOT that DMOZ list ALL reputable sites in any given category and that his site was rejected. Not at all.
    What everybody finds is that in many categories most reputable sites was rejected and DMOZ lists unkown sites (maybe editor's sites).

    That is what make people being sure that something is going very bad inside DMOZ. Editors ABUSE of they position to list what they WANT to list (because they have direct interests on that sites being listed) and ignore (or even BLOCK because its a competitor) that the rest of the sites in that category.

    That is why all this claimings about "being what they wan to be" sounds like a bla bla bla

    Becuase there is no credible explanation on listing SO BAD, with BIG MISTAKES and ignoring most sites that has big reputation on that category... and even, sometimes, listing unkown sites with multiple listings.

    Thats why people know that "quality" is not a fact and "own interests" are the real words behind this.
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  15. Caesar1

    Caesar1 Peon

    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    25
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #115
    Woot woot? the only people that seem to have a problem with DMOZ are the webmasters that don't get there sites listed or editors that have been banned. reputation is not a reason for being listed.
     
    Caesar1, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  16. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #116
    ???

    What???

    In first place DMOZ has lost a lot of traffic, showing that normal user do not find it usefull anymore. So your first argument looks like its wrong. Not only webmasters see a problem with DMOZ.

    In second place, having a directory that do not list reputable sites, do not list quality sites, is not being carefully on what they list... is that the philosophy behind DMOZ? Because that is what is REALLY happening on DMOZ.

    And the responsable people are not webmasters but editors.

    Stop giving excuses to explain why DMOZ often only lists a few, unkown, with no quality sites (maybe because those sites are editor's sites).
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  17. makrhod

    makrhod Peon

    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    29
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #117
    Sigh again.
    Nowhere, of course. Editors who abuse the directory lose their accounts, as you well know. Yet again you accuse me and my fellow volunteers of all sorts of wrongdoing, without responding to my frequent requests to name the sites that you believe I have listed abusively.

    Public abuse reports are of course usually confidential, but I am more than willing to make this public, because the accusations are becoming increasingly ridiculous and gworld's inability to support them is truly laughable.

    if you can't even name a single site which I have listed abusively, then kindly stop accusing me of corruption, and admit that you have made it up!

    No, it is those who do not read the guidelines who are blind. This is completely the wrong place to point out errors in the directory. There are several perfectly good options for doing this, and I encourage you to use them rather than shouting here.

    Sorry?
    There are millions and millions of sites in the directory, including this forum. Perhaps you think this is one of the "unknown" and "no quality" ones. :D
     
    makrhod, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  18. Caesar1

    Caesar1 Peon

    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    25
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #118
    I think search engines have hurt directories over the years, especially those that have been around as long as DMOZ. I don't think its the fault of DMOZ but rather a shift in technology of finding sites. more people find it easier using Google and Yahoo. I do think directories such as DMOZ, Yahoo and BOTW play a role, though but its not what it was years ago.

    The role of DMOZ in my opinion is to have a directory of sites with original and unique content.

    Are you saying this because your site isn't listed?
     
    Caesar1, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  19. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #119

    If i am wrong and you are not blind (and this is not the right place):

    1.- Why during several years nobody (even editors) notice such a BIG mistakes and unethic stuff? If there are "several" options, those option maybe does not work.

    2.- Why, after poiting here those problems, where corrected on 1 or 2 hrs?

    Accept it, DMOZ is very bad managed and no way to explain or justify many things.

    Stop using the guidelines to justify things that are just WRONG.

    ------------------

    One more example?

    http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Multimedia/Music_and_Audio/Audio_Formats/MP3/News_and_Media/

    Which is the criteria to list something there?
    List sites that offers news? List deeplinkings to particular (and irrelevant) news?

    Tell us about the guidelines on this specific category please.

    Because, after seeing the 120 listing on that category i can't explain which was the criteria of the editors.

    The idea is to post deeplinking to some particular news? Why they miss MANY of the BIG news and point to some very product-specific news (unknow products, irrelevant news, by the way)?

    Also the news are very old (2000-20001).

    Which guidelines i am missing that explain why having JUST a few news (deeplinking), very outdated and some about specific products (sounds spammy) and irrelevant stuff?

    This is what DMOZ "want to be"?

    *I am showing this info, because i read editors in this thread asking for proofs.
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP
  20. yenerich

    yenerich Active Member

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    75
    #120

    No.
    Because in many categories you mostly find unkown sites listed (some even twice!!) and almost no one of the most reputable.

    Or, per example:

    Just check yourself how many reputable sites are you missing, lets say, on music & audio >players.

    And, insted, DMOZ are linking to metric units software on that category!!

    Now you can understand what is was talking about?

    Or there is a guidelines to reject music players and list instead software non related? :)

    -----------------

    Okayl, that is enough for me on this thread. If someone is interested on understand, enough has being explained and showed.
    No need to have circular arguments and explain the same one more time.

    Thanks for your time! :)

    I hope DMOZ find its way out of this darkness.
     
    yenerich, Jun 3, 2009 IP