Need guaranteed DMOZ submission. PM please

Is becoming a DMOZ editor the only guarantee of our sites being listed in DMOZ?

 

Good point. Many of us would like to see the whole Adult section disappear, and I've never edited there, so I don't know anything about it.

What I'm trying to explain is what editors are attempting to do, and what they don't do. With a Directory this large, and with the number of editors available to take care of it, there is no way to make sure every single category is the way it should be.

I have no reason to be bitter, and I can return any time I want to, .

Many of us are for stopping all submissions, we really don't need them, but it goes against the Directorys contract with the public.

You're right, the Directory, for the most part, is not a destination site, and it most certainly isn't a search engine. (I love Google myself) But, if a searcher wanted to see a collection of sites about a topic (like water gardening) or a geographic area, (like St. Louis), and if they knew about the Directory (which most don't), then our categories can be quite helpful.

When have you ever seen the Directory or its editors serving webmasters or their needs? That's wishful thinking, but untrue. If that were true, we would accept all sites, including all of your mirrors, redirects, and afilliate garbage, and there would be no standards for accepting new editors, we could just throw the doors wide open and let everybody in. There would be no need for any Guidelines either.

Let me ask you something. If we have it all wrong, then why does Google value us so much that their own Directory is a mirror of the ODP. Why don't they start their own directory and take your submissions directly? Could it be that they understand and approve of the ODP standards and goals?

Why doesn't Google take your submissions directly and charge you for it? Wouldn't they get filthy rich at $200-$300 a pop or more?

 

LOL, speaking of arrogance

It's not really arrogance for a webmaster to think that this or that site is listable when compared to the sites in the category they have submitted too. Though the attitude many editors take to such webmasters certainly would fall under arrogance.

No. Several editors of smaller categories have sites outside of their area not listed... though I suppose it certainly helps.

 

Because it was one of the first big directories and at one point was an authority site. That has changed and the value of DMOZ have been totally diminished like many other directories. DMOZ is not the Goggle golden child like it once was and Goggle has just not decided that is was worth their time to start their own. It may happen someday but I am sure they have seen much larger opportunities. Besides since DMOZ is free, Google can make it look like they are offering something free that Yahoo charges for.

It still boils down to DMOZ means nothing except the chance for a free back link and a chance to be picked up by other directories who copy DMOZ.

Exactly, you are talking about your views not the views of DMOZ. Tell me that all of editors are above board and this guy will not find one of them to accept payment for a listing!

It is the ones that come on to webmaster forums and brag how important they are that is the problem. The ones who do their job quietly and really try to make the site great for both DMOZ and the webmasters are the ones that made DMOZ great in the beginning. They are becoming few and far between as of late and you are seeing the effect in the value of the directory.

 

I see your point having run a directory myself.
Thanks for the answer

 

You can use the dmoz submission service www.searchmarketingsales.com/DMOZ_submission_services.html. They say they guaranteed listing in 21days for $295.

 

They guarantee listings?

I wonder why there site isn't in dmoz? Bit odd isn't it?

I guess you can't always believe everything that you read or hear.

 

Maybe it has not been 21 days yet for them.

Imagine how many people can pay in a three week period and than you can put them off with tech problems and server problems until you can get quite the nest egg for your scam.

 

Read the link. they guarantee as SUBMISSION not a LISTING. lol

If anyone wants to pay me for a guaranteed submission, I'll gladly do it for only $50

 

Most people, like myself, are in a hurry when looking for information, and I don't think you can beat a good search engine, like Google. I use nothing but the Google tool bar now, I love it, so searching a Directory really isn't very time efficient anymore, but it does have it's occasional uses.

But, a Directory doesn't provide info directly to the searcher, search engines deliver it. A Directory merely collects, describes and organizes sites as data for others to use (like search engines). I suspect that Google likes a free resource that has already been (more or less) weeded out. A huge free labor force that they not only don't have to invest a penny in, but by using a mirror of it, can direct all complaints to. (because they don't have a directory of their own that accepts submissions).

The problem with that (for you and us), is that you're directing search engine issues to a directory, and the ODP neither cares nor deals with those issues, because they have nothing to do with building a directory.

I would never say that there are not, or have not been corrupt editors, but I can tell you that they are much easier to catch than you might think, and the consequences are immediate. I would also say that anyone who tries or has dealt with a corrupt editor is just as rotten and the consequences for them will be just as immediate.

Sooner or later the chances they both get caught are very high, and what has been done, can be undone, so I don't see that it would be worth doing in the long run. (and if you think metas are exempt, think again, I've seen it happen once).

Who's bragging about being important? I never said that in here as an editor and I'm not saying it now.

Is it really arrogant to say that we're a directory and search engine optimization issues are of no interest to us? Or to explain that we are not a listing service for submitters? Or that our only goal is to serve information seekers and not you?

Believe me, I think we completely understand your view that webmasters build sites, and you feel that because the Directory collects and organizes sites, something is somehow owed to webmasters.

The truth is, those sites are out on the Internet and free for the taking. If none of them existed, there would be no need for a directory, but they do exist, we can collect and organize them at will, and no, non editor webmasters had nothing to do with building the Directory, so nothing is owed to them.

That's not arrogance, that's fact.

 

Crowbar, I can appreciate what you say but don't you think some of the arguments are reasonable. The problem is not so much what Dmoz is but what it has become, through no fault of it's own, a semi-elite club has been created. Companies like Google place too much weight on it.

Everyone wants to get ranked in Google and on their help pages they tell us we should get listed in places like Dmoz and Yahoo directories, and quite frankly I think they should drop the connection to Dmoz. This way you could get on with being the directory you claim to be.

For those of us that want to get into the "Google" (Dmoz) directory, we have little to no chance. The elite part comes into play because as you have said yourself you want all sites to be different in each category. I have a few guitar sites that I have never managed to get listed in Dmoz. Some of my sites are a lot better than many listed in the directory but they aren't different. There's only so much I can do to make my guitar site different from any other guitar site but there's a lot I can do to make it better than some of the others. This, according to your criteria isn't enough (unless I misunderstand you). Those that got in first have an edge in Google Serps that I may never be able to get.

Yes I know I can still get top results in Google without Dmoz but if Google etc didn't place the weight on it then our jobs would be slightly easier. As it stands, it isn't a level playing field for those of us building more recent sites, wanting to get good Google ranking. If it's anybody's fault then perhaps we should blame companies like Google for creating the Dmoz problem. It can't be denied though that this problem does exist.

Not trying to diss Dmoz but just bring some balance to the argument. IMO your argument loses some credibility while Dmoz allows other companies to use them as their own directory.

 

I happen to agree with that. Much of the frustration stems from trying to get ranked on Google, and the only way into Google seems to be through being listed by the ODP. (dmoz)

Google and Dmoz are totally seperate entities, one is a search engine that delivers info, one is a directory that collects and organizes info, so they have different goals.

The Directory sees Google as just one more entity that freely uses its data. Though it's the largest, it's just one of many directories that download our data. There is no communication between the two, that I know of, neither one works for the other. We have no say in what they do or don't do, as long as they follow the Attribution Requirement.
http://www.dmoz.org/license.html

A site doesn't have to be different, it needs to have something on it that's different, some unique content that will make it stand out informationwise.

A guitar site hits quite close to home for me, as both of my sons are knowledgeable musicians, and one just spent a thousand bucks on a Kretch? or Gretch? guitar. I'm terrible on names and I'm not a musician, but if you had a down to earth explanation of all the gadgets on this thing (the way my son explained it to me), you would absolutely have the kind of unique content that an editor is looking for on a site.

Unique content is very easy to come up with. It could be something as simple as your personal profile. Who are you, what your background in music is, do you have a brick & mortar store, where did you get your knowledge, why can I trust buying from you?

What is the difference between one guitar and another? Do you offer a setup service? The guitar my son just bought has to have the upper frets filed down, the springs changed to take #12 strings, and it has to be setup perfect. It had to be sent out for that, the store itself didn't do that.

Is your address on the site? If I'm spending a thousand bucks, I want to know where you're located and what your shipping policy is.

It is not enough to have photos and prices, that's a given, something every site has. What do you have that's going to make the the searcher say, "Wow, that's really helpful. I didn't know that."

For instance, this guitar was recently pulled from a guitar catalog/magazine ad because it's completely sold out and on back order, they are very difficult to get. That's a temporary situation, but it's unique content/information.

That will still not get your site listed, though, or listed quickly. It depends on how many editors work in that area of the Directory, how many categories they are editing in, how many site suggestions they need to wade through, and how much free time they have to devote to editing.

The objective for an editor is to build categories, not to review every site that gets suggested/submitted, so there isn't any real hurry when you're doing that.

If I'm building a collection of marbles, and I have a bucket full of suggested marbles to look through, the object isn't to empty the bucket as quickly as possible, the objective is to build a good collection for those who are interested in viewing the collection.

If an editor only has one or two small categories, it's not usually a problem, but good editors are usually encouraged to take on higher categories to edit from, and that usually means there are literally thousands and thousands of categories beneath that to edit in. No one person can possibly stay on top of all of them, so we hop around a lot, and added to that, there are many other tasks to perform, like reorgs, projects, training editors, and a lot of structure work.

I can't begin to tell you how interesting it can be, how complicated it can get, and how many different things there are to do, besides just reviewing suggested sites, or hunting down new ones on your own.

 

Crowbar, Thanks for the reply, thats actually some useful information, gives me more to think about next time I suggest a site.

Btw, It's a Gretsch

 

lol why peoples still get stressed to get listed on dmoz when you can pay arround $300 and get listed into yahoo directory ? much faster / much easy and pretty good for me I think ... anyway none cares about dmoz I submited one of my domains there also and nothing but nothing change ... when I submited to yahoo .... surprize lol .

 

You can get listed in DMOZ for only $50 and it is as easy and may be faster.

 

Gworld is correct! Though paying the wrong editor can result in a perm-ban from the directory... so pay at your own risk

 

plus, its a real bummer when the person you are trusting to be honest is doing a dishonest act. Can very likely just stiff you anyway.

 

They only get paid after listing the site.

 

Adding a site not worthy, getting paid, then removing the site is well within their power