DMOZ Paid Inclusion

Even if that is true, it still means basically nothing... DMOZ -- and most other directories -- are practically useless for SEO these days. It ain't 2002 any more.

 

I have never said it was.

 

In bloated XML Bytes maybe... by just unique URLs added averaged monthly DMOZ has been losing for a long time and quality of URLs added is sad. You are unconvincing too because of the thousands of DMOZ posts here there aren't any with people saying things like "It worked for me"... or "my site got listed, it just took a little while"... Fastest growing in spammy listings... you win... total believer there.

 

No in total sites. Can I suggest you download some successive rdf dumps and get the actual numbers. Then come back and apologise for getting it wrong.

 

What are the actual numbers... and for that matter, the actual sites? Just a few days worth should be enough to compare... Yahoo gives them by day.

 

Exactly, DMOZ isnt popular anymore, they have lost the respect? from webmasters as it does take to long for our sites to be put on there. I have tried to get all my sites into there, but havent heard back from them.

 

I woudn't pay $299 to be listed, that is what Yahoo is currently charging

 

As you know, I have no access to the internal workings at DMOZ, so can only go by what is publicaly available:

Here some of the numbers of increase in the number of sites at DMOZ:
August 2010: 7565
April 2010: 3973
Jan 2010: 9159

Yahoo! Directory I do not track, but if you look at the new listings pages:
http://dir.yahoo.com/new/, you will see that they only list 30-40 a day

 

I don't need too... I'm right and anecdotal evidence is enough to prove it. Out of the tens of thousands of DMOZ posts here there aren't any where someone says submitting to dmoz worked for them. There are infinitely more posts on this very same forum of people saying getting a yahoo link worked for them. The burden is on you to prove the massive discrepancy or I win.

No apology for the snobby editor.

 

I have no idea what you are talking about. Do you have evidence that I am wrong then produce it rather than whinging webmasters who have crap sites that are not worthy of listing or can't manipulate DMOZ for their own SEO purposes??

BTW, ... I am not even an editor!

If you are unhappy with the service that DMOZ is providing you, then ask for a refund and take your business elsewhere. DMOZ owes webmasters nothing .... funny how they complain about it.

 

Again, out of the tens of thousands of DMOZ posts here there aren't ANY where someone says submitting to dmoz worked for them. Out of every thousand "whiners", as you call DP's members, not even one of them has had success in getting listed. I dont believe you are not an editor. I'm tired of the dmoz "sh#t don't stink" excuses especially since you are touting how great they are. Everybody already takes their business elsewhere, that's the default incase you've missed every DMOZ post ever written in the past 5 years. I'm glad volunteer firefighters and relief workers and food banks and free clinics don't have the same work ethic as dmoz volunteers. Dmoz is getting the flack they deserve for offering a free service that claims to be fair but isn't. If dmoz doesn't like it they shouldn't claim to be what they are not.

 

Luckily, it doesn't need to work, because no one uses it for searches and it has ZERO influence on the SERPs. If it disappeared tomorrow, no one would notice except webmasters with dense cobwebs in their notions of SEO, and "editors" that will need to find some other (hopefully more useful) hobby.

 

As an editor I didn't add any suggested sites... there were none suggested in my category!

As an end user of the ODP, I have submitted sites, and those sites HAVE made it in! Though I have no clue if it was due to the suggestion or if it was due to an editor finding the site through other means.

Though I can say, of all the sites I have submitted only a VERY VERY small number of them have been included, and all have conformed to the guidelines, save the part about 'editorial discretion' which is the ONLY guideline many of them care to follow.

So as you can see, the ODP does work, end user submitted sites DO make it in!

Though it remains to be seen if that is due to the suggestion or otherwise. I can say though that MANY editors do have MANY sites they own listed. In some cases multiple listings... in one case nearly 20 deep link listings for pages that do NOT conform to the guidelines. That could certainly explain why they have larger numbers...

 

This is a directory, not the fourth emergency service.
Where does DMOZ offer a listing service for site owners?

 

Erm, have you checked out www.dmoz.org! Its a service for listing websites! It's AWESOME! You should try it sometime!

 

DMOZ has become what it is for it's integrity. That is probably one of the reasons why Google defaults to it as it's 'directory'. I have submitted sites over a year ago, and am still waiting. I'll be grateful to be accepted because of it's reputation.

 

That "reputation" you speak of has long gone. You need to wake up as Google hasn't had any preference for dmoz for a LONG time, go on, type 'directory' into google, do you see dmoz on the front page? I sure don't. By your own admission it's taking over a year to get listed and you don't see anything wrong with that? I would expect even the very worst of volunteer organizations handle submissions in that timeframe.

 

You lot amaze me

Everyone claims DMOZ is useless, past it, editors are lazy and corrupt......but almost everyone is trying to get their site published. Now to me, it seems to me that the major reason for wanting to be included is that it is "percieved" as being so hard to be included, so it must be "The Magic Link".

If DMOZ did publish every site suggested, irregardless of quality, would the link then be as highly valued as it is today? I dont think so. So what i'm saying is that if every site was accepted and published, then the very act of doing so would be what turns the link into nothing different from any other directory......if that makes sense.

So the editors invoved, that are simply undertaking their hobby as and when they wish, really are in a "No Win" situation. No wonder we are so reluctant to communicate too often with people suggesting sites........perhaps we are sick of the arguements as to why your site is the best and why it should be included?

 

If I hated DMOZ and believed it to be as bad as some of you do, I certainly would not waste the skin on my fingers posting here. If its part it, more negative posts will just be a waste of effort typing.

Snooks is right, most want to be in, but if you can't manage that, then slag it off as being useless.

 

If dmoz will accept paid inclusion then there will be no value
of DMOZ and google might also not use dmoz listed sites as trusted sites.
DMOZ should always be free and open source.