"DMOZ is Dead...Long Live the Open Directory Movement!"

yeah yeah. Not in the case of the senior editors I get on with. Like I did they list thousands of sites belonging to people they have never met nor are ever likely to. Those you refer to are a relatively small minority and not on my Christmas list. There are grains of truth in what you say but it is unfair to paint the large majority of decent honest editors with the same brush.

 

DMOZ should listen to webmasters...collectively. Obviously I don't mean that DMOZ should listen to Pharmaceutical_Joe about bycheapdrugsonlinecheapplynow.com, but the collective webmaster feeling, imo, is that DMOZ....isn't comprehensive.

Who are the other possible judges? Editors? Users? Editors are subjective. Users have no opinion. That leaves only webmasters.

 

And Webmasters are what? Objective?

Seriously, I'm a Webmaster but why should dmoz listen to me?

To be honest, I'm also an editor, though not a very active one anymore. I was an editor a long time before becoming a Webmaster and I can say from experience that my days of editing helped me be a much better Webmaster.

 

I think webmasters can be objective if they want to be. Honestly DMOZ has editors who are also webmasters and most of them do a great job. It depends on the person.

 

Again, I'm referring to webmasters as a collective group. How can I say this more clearly?

 

I understood what you said. My question is why?

I don't disagree with that, I'm one of those webmasters. I actually believe that if webmasters as a collective group became editors they might have a different opinion but only if they entered into it with an objective mind collectively. But don't hold your breath ...

 

Me too. I just gave an example of why I came to that conclusion.

 

Right, some categories have great editors, some don't. I can only speak for my experience. In my experiences, the editors are lacking.

I know you're tempted to chalk this up as a disgruntaled webmaster, but I really don't put much weight on the DMOZ link, so I'd chalk it up to an exceptionally poorly edited category at best.

 

If by lacking you mean there aren't enough of us, then you're correct.

No, you don't know me so you don't know what I'm tempted to do. Sorry, but that's a fact.

You seem like you're looking for a fight and I'm not, so I'm done with you. Good luck.

 

Whoaaaa there haus. I was actually saying "you" as in, whoever was reading my post, not to you specifically.

 

I believe that DMOZ communicates itself to webmasters very poorly and at times seems to deliberately build up false expectations that it then leaves editors to correct (and get shot at for doing so).

DMOZ serves the surfers and they do have an opinion - it is called traffic. I strongly suspect that I am not alone in having moved onto other sources of information as the Internet advances via the likes of Wikipedia and better Google algorythms. Whilst DMOZ has not moved a single millimeter, stuck in 1998 and oblivious to the world moving around it.

For example, a strong internal search engine would have boosted direct usage. Focussing on core informational sites rather than wasting time trying to cover everything including gambling, porn, ringtones, online travel agencies, e-cards, and every other conceivable spam-ridden sector. Training editors, being more innovative about prevention of corruption through internal checks rather than excluding anyone in the least suspect, kicking the secrecy, elected hierarchies, proper risk and issue management.

Minstrel made a good point about the only useful directories being niche directories. DMOZ has the ability to be a decent collection of niche directories. But to do so it has to dump the crap.

Editors are lacking in numbers, effective leadership and direction, training, motivation, but most are not lacking in a belief in what they are trying to achieve. It is a pity they are let down at the top. Badly.

Commercial webmasters in general, not individuals who will vary, have as their objective the maximisation of traffic to their own sites in order to make money. That objective is incompatible with the purpose of DMOZ and is why the opinions of commercial webmasters as a whole are worse than useless to DMOZ.

 

You're right on the button there. Sadly, few here will believe you .

 

Which of course leads to the next obvious question: Who exactly DOES the DMOZ directory serve? I've yet to see any convincing evidence demonstrating that anyone beyond

1. webmasters
2. DMOZ editors
3. friends and family of DMOZ editors

has even heard of DMOZ, much less ever uses it for anything at all.

Thus, we have a community of editors working on a project which excludes the only internet group that actually knows about it or cares about it.

That's a bit weird when you think about it.

 

All these years of hostility yet you don't know what ODP is about? How rational is that?

 

That will be a good idea since at the same time will cause that many of DMOZ "senior" editors to leave the directory forever. Since one of the major hinders in DMOZ development is the existence of these "senior" editors, it will be a big step forward.

 

Translation: DPlurker doesn't know the answer either.

How about "all these years and I've yet to see a satisfactory and rational answer"?

The only one that makes sense so far is this one: The directory exists as a hobby site for editors. Period. No one else gives a damn. Including, evidently, AOL and Google.

 

Exactly IMHO. Any benefit anybody else derives from it is a bonus, a mere side effect.

So what have you got against hobbies?
Don't you have any hobbies?

 

-Well I might agree in my opinion the directory exists as a hobby

-I don't agree no one gives a damn, or this forum wouldn't be busy with so many post about Dmoz

-I only somewhat care what AOL may think because they pay the bills , I don't care what Google think about Dmoz.

 

Those senior editors who would leave if the high spam porn, gambling, etc categories were removed would not be missed by the editors who believe in the concept. So good riddance.

 

Hmm, if by some miracle this happens it would be interesting turn of events, any senior editor leaving DMOZ after that would come under suspicion that he/she was actually only there for his/her self-interests.