I would first like to state that I do not want this thread to be an actual rant fest. My goal in creating it is to find the inherent flaws within the system so that we can stand together in helping to make the Open Directory Project once again what it was (or should be) open, and a boon to the internet community as a whole. What I'm seeking is actual complaints rather then just "they would not list my site" or "DMOZ is DEAD" as those topics are pretty much covered here at Digital Point I do have hope that there is still room for correction, but I also feel that in order to correct the problems, we must first know all of the problems. I would like to compile a list of all of the things that are wrong with the project in relation to how it should be. I feel that with such a list, we (I?) could better formulate official complaints to the likes of AOL, Netscape, and other affiliated projects that revolve around the ODP. Thanks in advance, Q
I am not sure I can hold back my inner ranter. Too many things are wrong and there is nothing to be salvaged. (1) Desirability of concept: ***Search engines can pinpoint to words on a single webPAGE that went online as recently as 15 minutes ago - think of Google News. ***DMOZ only lists webSITE homepages with a 14 month delay. (2) Useability: ***With search engines and a proper keyword query you can distinguish between sites that have widget reviews, those and sell widgets, or rent widgets, or have widget plans or widget whatever. ***With DMOZ you have to drill up and down arcane categories. (3) Fairness ***Search engines do not tag the sites of former employees in order to keep them in the SERP dump. ***DMOZ will tag the sites of former editors. (4) Leadership ***Larry and Sergei are said to be some pretty cool dudes with a progressive vision, and understand the necessity for change, change, change. ***The ODP "leadership" lives in houses with wheels or goes to the toilet in shared facilities. They don't like any change to their little world. Party like it's 1999. Nineteen-ninety-nine! Woo-hoo! (5) Mental illness ***If you aren't feeling like yourself at the Googleplex, the boss will give you paid leave until you feel better. ***At DMOZ you might be given more "responsibilities." Remember that tedious, boring, repetitive tasks like approving websites have a unique appeal for people that suffer from OCD, or have some other grief to deal with - in which case, the purpose of the Directory is not really to list websites as stated, but to provide therapy for a few people. I know you are an optimist, Q, but the whole exercize of categorizing website has been rendered completely futile by the far, far better search engines. There is nothing worth saving. I know that. AOL knows that. Heck, Skrenta knows that, too, and he came up with the ODP. The only thing that will improve it is AOL pulling the plug on life support.
If you read previous posts there are more then enough good advices which naturally would never pass bureaucracy since bureaucracy never changes... In my opinion merging it into Wikipedia, which has spam problems and resulting paranoia about links and could use some kind of external links filter and approval system and has no problem with editor numbers, is only way to save what can be saved... but this also means that most of the useless commercial, porn links would get deleted... the horror!
"AOL, Netscape, and other affiliated projects" have already shown that they totally realize how worthless it has become, by prolonging a server outage over several months. If the ODP data wasn't worth backing up, if ther servers were hardly worth fixing, if the software was barely worth restoring... "AOL, Netscape, and other affiliated projects" are not going to spend a MINUTE improving the creature from the Jurassic Directory. If "AOL, Netscape, and other affiliated projects" are wise enough to stop throwing good money after bad, and decided to let the ODP slip into the inevitable oblivion, why are we wasting OUR time? I am going to heed my own advice. I have some peonies outdoors that desperately need watering, and they are more important than DMOZ.
There are so many wrongs with dmoz so the question you should have asked instead " What is good about Dmoz ? " its called reverse therapy or something.
Good: DMOZ's days are numbered. Good: webmasters will finally stop worrying about their listing. Good: webmasters might not even bother submitting. Good: people like Annie won't get hurt by petty self-important nutcases. I think things are going in the right direction. Not quickly enough perhaps, but in the right direction.
Thanks for starting this thread So much of knowledge sharing. I am sure people are learing But one thing is that Google still counts a link from DMOZ. That is why we webmasters run after DMOZ links
Google counts a link from DMOZ the same way it counts a link from any page with similar PR. "Running" after DMOZ links is so... sooooo... so 2002. So you shouldn't be "running" to get that dumb link, maybe you should just submit when you have a bit of free time, and move on with your life, as you would for any other link request.
This pretty much says it all. Excellent summary of why DMOZ is doomed. I said basically the same things about DMOZ at WebProWorld back in 2004. Nothing at DMOZ has changed for the better since then.
LMAO... wow, the great Minstrel said something and nothing changed?? Why?? They should of put up a team of experts to follow you wonderful adivce! Ah, Minstrel, the expert answer to every single question in the world...
I had a read of some of those old webproworld threads and WOW you've been stomping around the forums moaning about the ODP since 2003. That sort of dedication should not go unrewarded and I feel that you should get some sort of recognition. There was a guy called Netesq who started his grumping in 2000, but he quit a couple of years ago, so you must be close to breaking his record. Comparing your older posts to the latest ones it seems that you have been getting crankier. Have you been getting enough sleep recently? Anyhow its great seeing someone persevere with such an unusual hobby such as yours, keep up the good work.
Thanks, Neb. Always good to see a DMOZ editor doing his homework. But perhaps you missed the point: The things that people are pointing out as wrong with DMOZ today are the same things that people pointed as wrong with DMOZ in 2003 (thanks for correcting the date). Very little if any progress has been made in the past 4 years. Why would anyone reasonably expect any progress from the DMOZ dinosaur in the next 4 years?
It depends whether good people with backbone are willing to stand up to maladministration in sufficient quantities to change things. Currently the only way to stand up is to stand down. New ownership might do it - never give up hope.
I think that things have changed quite a bit since you left brizzie. There is now a clear consensus at all levels that the ODP that things need to change quite significantly. When, if and how AOL will act on this is another matter. From AOLs past record it could easily be another 4 years, or never.
LMAO! So, after 4 years, "There is now a clear consensus at all levels that the ODP that things need to change quite significantly." Can you point to any positive changes that have actually occurred since 2003? If it took 4 years to reach a consensus that things need to change, how long will it take before they actually change? And how long will DMOZ admins and mtas continue to blame the lack of action on AOL?