Is DMOZ even relevant anymore??

i have submitted all types of sites to DMOZ (blogs, directories, flash sites, business sites and more) and havent ever received a response... i understand how important they are but they only seem to update with new corporate startups from aol and what not.. it seems no new websites with quality content are included.. what gives? should i even bother submitting to them ever again? and if so what type of sites usually get in?

 

They hardly ever accept new qualified editors so they are short staffed.. and always complaining

 

Dozens of new editors are accepted every week, and it is not them who are complaining.

I have no idea why you would say this, when many hundreds of sites are added every day, none of them even slightly related to corporations of any sort, let alone AOL.

Perhaps you do not understand that DMOZ is not a listing service, and suggestions made by webmasters are nothing more than one resource that editors can use if they want to.
For example, I have added over 25,000 sites to the directory, and probably only a few hundred of those were suggested by their owners.
As for what sorts of sites are acceptable, you can easily see for yourself: http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html

 

WOW! 100s out of 25000!!! well thats answers my question. $crew DMOZ!

 

DmoZ is not really needed.

 

I'll take that as a thank you, shall I? Glad I could help you to understand how DMOZ works.

 

Nice try but you failed to quote him on the last part:

 

Think you missed the sarcasm.


I don't see why so many people even bother posting their complaints about DMOZ in this section. Stop wasting time; it's one link, and doesn't account for much traffic to a website (nor a notable SERPs increase). If you quit your whining, you'd be making money by promoting elsewhere!

 

Our site is not listed in the ODP but it was voted the top destination blog by international publications recently.
Heck, it was even shown at Forbes.

Content to list ? I just don't know what qualified sites they are looking for.

 

Cannot agree more

 

If DMOZ/ODP were no longer relevant, this forum would have faded away. ;P

The very fact that people keep getting so agitated about it is proof that it still matters. The fact that volunteers do not do what webmasters think we should - that's what is irrelevant. The directory's aims and policies are freely available for everyone to read. If you don't agree with them, go find a directory which suits you better.

I have already given the link showing the sorts of sites we look for, and those are the sorts of sites I have listed. But that doesn't mean that ALL suitable sites are listed. Of course not. What a ridiculous notion. We are volunteers, and free to spend as little as or as much time as we like on editing. Some editors might find and add thousands of sites. Others might add only a few. It all helps.

And instead of getting mad at DMOZ and its editors for not listing your particular site, how about thinking of all the hundreds of thousands of people who might benefit from a listing without having to do anything at all other than create a worthwhile site with unique content. Now that's what I call a good result.

 

How exactly does one get listed? We've been trying since Nov 2004 :/

Any other routes they offer besides cat submissions?

 

I submit my website to dmoz, but also have no response, I think it is needed for us really?

 

yea i think so. Maybe thats why its soooo hard to get in. ;<

 

As we don't offer a listing service, there is no way to "get listed".

Editors build categories for information seekers. In doing so, they have a variety of places to find new sites, one of them is sites suggested by the public.

The Directory is set up to allow the public to suggest any site they find helpful, to the ODP editors for consideration. The editors can choose to look at those sites, or to ignore them completely.

The reason for that is because we build categories, and we have many sources to choose from, but we do not provide a listing service for site owners, nor does any site have a "right" to be listed. You only have a right to "suggest" a site.

There are sites that we want, because it makes the category a better resource, but there are many sites that we just can't use, so they will be deleted, and that's perfectly fine.

 

Maybe if you have a friend who is a editor on DMOZ, it would be easier for you for your site to get listed there. xD
hehehe.

 

DMOZ is a thing of the past guys, It holds no relevance now days.

 

That's not only possible, but a very legitimate way of adding a good site, if it meets our criteria, but the editor would have to state his affiliation with that site right on his editing dashboard where it could be examined, and as there are many other editors who can and do edit in any category, any preferential treatment would be spotted eventually.

Kind of stupid for an editor to point out a site he had no business adding in the first place, or giving it any kind of preferential treatment. Experienced editors are quite adept at spotting such things at a glance.

You could very well be correct, though I use both Google and the Directory categories in my personal searches, but that really doesn't affect the work that editors do in building categories as a hobby.

I think it only affects SEO guys and the thousands of site owners trying to get listed. It certainly doesn't affect my own editing.

 

@crowbar I didn't realize there was official DMOZ support here. We both joined this site in Oct 07' but you got busy and i'm still a Peon lol so wasnt aware personel was on here. Thx much for the clarification.

I'll take my mind off being listed hehe. Its a GREAT service though! I'm not gonna try to bash it because we can't get in. lol

In fact, I use to be an Editor on DMOZ in the Honda section for 2 years back in 2000 before my near fatal car accident in 2002.

This is pretty cool graphic:

 

There isn't. As my signature says:
"All of my comments are personal opinion based on editing experience and not official ODP representation."

I think it's safe to say that all editors are equal, as far as opinion goes, but there is a big difference sometimes in the amount of knowledge, experience, and editing permissions between editors.

You can't expect an editor of one category to have the same knowledge and experience that an editor who edits in thousands of categories might have (as I do), and my knowledge and experience comes no where close to what a meta editor like makrhod has. Whatever she says carries a lot more weight than anything I say.

If I say something that's incorrect, I know she'll correct me because none of us want to misinform anyone, and neither of us have egos, we're fellow editors.