Google and DMOZ Myth Explained

www.k4z.org/blog/google-and-dmoz-myth-explained

Google and DMOZ Myth Explained

Google has updated its algorithms and having a site on DMOZ means as much to Google as horse face does to Sarah Palin.

 

Oh I so wish that was true - then perhaps the spammers would go spam somewhere else.

Sadly that's an idle hope. Even if you're correct, the spammers probably aren't taking any notice of what you say .

Where did you get this information from? Are you a Google employee or did you read it somewhere on the internet? The former makes you something of an authority. The latter doesn't .

 

I might be wrong but only 2-3 types of people might have factual information IMHO .
Google engineers - who would be under strict guidelines and penalty laws probably to disclose information .
Google spokesperson - They might have some level of authority , but if they did have such a thing to say , it would be on the official Google channels .

 

i never ever able get listed on dmoz..

 

I am not an employee. I have my sources of links

google.co.uk/search?q=dmoz+myth

Many people talking about it. Just got pondering - a whole forum dedicated to DMOZ - I am sure with the talent on here we could make our own directory more powerful in rankings, traffic and better than DMOZ - just take a good 20 members on here

 

Many have tried, and many have failed. I wish you the best!

Until webmaster circles all get on the same page the powers of DMOZ will stand, as they have. Many of it's myths USED to be a reality, and at one time the ODP was one of the best ways to find a site. While that has changed, there are still WAY too many blogs out there saying that DMOZ is still the top notch directory it used to be before the likes of Yahoo and Google made finding sites much easier.

And to comment further on your first post, Google still does hold DMOZ higher then most directories, if for no other reason then it has a clone of the project on it's own pages...

 

I think way too many people place reliance on a link from DMOZ. Sure it can benefit your site, and I have no doubt the big-G places extra weightings for links from DMOZ to your site - but I truly think that the time spent attempting to get your link in is better placed doing alternate link buildings strategies.

I also believe that unscrupulous editors are rife when it comes to DMOZ

 

The editors on DMOZ have brown noses

 

Brown noses to whom? Certainly not AOL, there is no one to brown a nose on. To the Meta team? I don't think so, at least not since Crowbar left to play WOW. Certainly not Google, look at what they think of that place by checking out the other posts here.

 

A link is still a link, even if devalued. My question is do all the clones' links count toward link popularity or are they devalued since Google should know that they are all really the same link?

 

Devalued mostly likely. If google bot can read smiling faces in human photos by scanning them - they have picked up on shitty blog niche sites which earn 1p a year on adsense and sell here

 

although probably correct that google has weighed down dmoz listings, but still, there are a lot of other search engines out there which still give Dmoz a lot of importance.

 

@Env - all of this was explained on Google Groups by both John Mu and Matt Cutts.

Source: http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help-chit-chat/browse_thread/thread/f943766fde76e87e

Source: http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help/web/q-a-from-the-3rd-live-chat-oct-2008

Question Posed to Matt: Recently, you removed this suggestion: "Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!" from your guidelines. Is there any chance that you will be discounting these kinds of links for ranking value in future?

So that puts a big bucket of icy cold water on that fire.

What I find most interesting about people bringing up the idea that DMOZ is somehow dead because Google has removed it from its webmaster guidelines, is that the same people neglect the fact that the following line was also removed from the guidelines:

Have other relevant sites link to yours.

So, continuing along that line of thinking, are relevant links also dead? Should we stop obtaining relevant links or tell people to stop linking to us? C'mon, wake up!

People who engage in this hype and speculation really have too much time on their hands... Arsonists put away your matches

 

The link of the OP reads like a law student wrote it.

And of course the third type is some one who has tested a site by running it both without and with a DMOZ listing.

 

Have you tested with and without dmoz - content is king - so is returning rich traffic which engage with the product, site, app or forum etc..

 

Well I'd take my chances, I have a site that is perfect for DMOZ and its not commercial but strictly educational and I cant get listed.
At this point I'd pay someone to get me listed.

Its sad that legit sites that just want to publish valuable sites with no hidden agenda can't even get listed.

 

Why don't you just volunteer. don't pay for a listing!

 

I did volunteer, and was turned down, I volunteered for a section I was interested in that hadn't had a new listing in months and the response was that we had enough editors for that section!

 

I was turned down my first time also. I really looked at the questions in the application and thought about it before submitting again, looking at other listings in the site and their descriptions. then I was approved. I subitted a site about a year ago and it still wasn't listed, it wasn't till I became an editor that I understood why. the section had no editor and I submitted it to the wrong section and the right section had no editor either. one of my goals as being an editor is to put an end to that for all the sections I edit. many people say 'oh they don't care' ect, when the real problem is man power.

 

Actually, that's not what the explanation says, but in any case, unless you were asked not to re-apply, you are very welcome to do so. Many current editors were accepted only after taking a little more care with a subsequent application.

The feedback you were sent provides some advice, and there are many other resources to help you understand what is required, so if you are interested in helping out, please re-apply!

(For a start, I suggest applying for a category with up to about 50-60 sites, and certainly fewer than 100.)