a New Dmoz

I am not sure what you are getting at Eric. The editor in chief is this guy http://www.dmoz.org/profiles/rdkeating25.html No big secrets or black helicopters there.

You can help, and that is why your editor application was as approved. What is it exactly that you are you expecting from the editor in chief?

 

Can you show me where it says that he is the big guy? I mean, other then his profile.

It may not be a secret, but it's certainly far from common knowledge, at least from the common knowledge of the average submitter and the supposed end user. DMOZ sure could use a "contact" page!

And as for black helicopters, mind giving us your editor name?

 

Maybe he is playing a prank on him waiting for every Digital Point member to send him an email asking "When will my site be listed?"

 

It should speed up blacklisting process...

 

Check out The MasterMOZ Web Directory
http://mastermoz.com

Thanks!

 

I get a 404 on http://www.eisnx.com/. I just happened to click on that one, I didn't try any others.

I don't like all the ads, they're distracting, but the descriptions are great, . It might be better to put all the ads to the right, instead of having them on both sides. That way a web surfer would get presented with the listings, which is what they're there for, and the ads would just be a side effect. Still noticeable, but not so in your face.

 

Dmoz web 2.0 ?

 

DMOZ is fundamentally flawed as has been suggested here over and over again. It seems the pace of inclusion for truly good sites as at best a slug climbing uphill through molasses. Additionally, the continued assertions that editors are corrupt doesn't help matters.

If Google continues to use DMOZ as a criteria for SERP positions then DMOZ will continue to be important. But like many other folks have suggested all you can do is submit and forget and hope that at some point you might be included in the directory.

If someone were to meld the concept of a Wiki with a DMOZ directory where each submission that was suggested was also open for comment by members of the Wiki this might be helpful - social mechanisms for ranking sites are never really a great idea, though. They seem to fall victim to potential for corruption.

I wish no ill to DMOZ and woudl like to see it repaired and charging ahead, but the negativity associated with the directory at this point leads em to wonder if it will ever find its' way to deserving of the weight it carries.

 

Edr everything you've said echoes are sentiments. The main contention and question being if Google didn't hold DMOZ with some value would it still exist? We probably all know the answer and that's a shame.

It may change over time, who knows.

 

For most of last year it was taken as granted that Google attached little value to the ODP. Matt Cutts was saying that there was no special boost given by an odp listing. The Google directory had not been updated for well over a year. It appeared to many that any relationship between the two was kaput.

Yet the directory remained unaffected, it was business as normal. The google/dmoz relationship is something that webmasters and SEOs get all excited about. In the bigger picture to the directory it is not a mission critical issue.

 

Newbie here, so if I'm not right, apologies...

Aren't some of the social sites like Digg and Stumble Upon taking the place of DMOZ?

A good Digg, helped me immediately in terms of traffic, and getting listed by Google.

Valkerie

 

StumbleUpon: http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=stumbleupon.com
Digg: http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=digg.com

 

Watch this space, not going to say anything more.

 

Those are likely some of the reasons a NEW DMOZ is needed.

The DIGG of an article is listed, rather then the article itself. That, IMHO, is a perfect example of why they need tighter control and should actually FOLLOW the guidelines rather then call them shaky. Or rather, maybe this is the perfect example of why the guidelines are considered shaky.

Oh, wait... it IS listed...

So the article itself is listed as well as the digg for the article. Should I stumble it so it can get three listings?

 

Just to be clear (again) it was your advice that I called shaky not the guidelines.

You realy need to give it a rest Christopher. People don't want to hear this over and over and over.

 

If you use FireFox, install SEO Quake and do several searches for competitive terms. If you scroll down the page you will see that some first page results are listed in DMOZ and some are not. So DMOZ is just one factor.

Where I have seen it do well is that others use the DMOZ database to populate their directory so if you get a link in DMOZ you can get links in several other sites which helps in SERPs and PageRank. I saw one meet up group get a PageRank of 6 only a few months after establishment and listing in DMOZ.

Again, DMOZ is one factor but there are probably over 200 factors that feed into any search engine's algorithm.

 

Well spotted, and its because of this duplication that Google need to, and probably will act in diluting juice leakage becuase its a false representation.

 

Jamie, other directories have been using ODP data for for nearly ten years. "Diluting juice leakage" is a is something you just made up isn't it?. I prefer to dilute my juice with tequila, however I think that google use something called a duplicate content filter.

 

I'm well aware of that but thanks for the attempt at a history lesson.

Yeah I make everything up, not an ounce of my words mean a single thing, I'm totally wrong, your right, your someone I admire so much I aspire to be you one day. (NOT). I wondered what was behind all the rubbish you post, I can see its the tequila, try quitting, perhaps then you'll write some constructive posts instead of thinking you know it all when in reality its clear you now very little.

 

Just to be clear, my advice was to follow the guidelines, and you said my advice was shaky. It stands to reason you feel that following the guidelines is shaky.

And you are right, people likely do not want to hear this time & time again... so why not come out and say what you told me in PM ~ that there was nothing wrong with following the 10 points I gave.

You come from a strange lot don't you? The duplicate content filters strain the Google Juice so that the links have a watered down PR taste to them...

Though, if you are that much on correcting people, mind explaining how you dilute link juice with tequila?