So What Is Wrong With Editors Accepting Cash for Listings

OR Google drops DMOZ.

The only active discussion subject in the internal forum is about Google next update from DMOZ but that is possibly because the editors are "volunteers" and they don't care about Google.

 

You are living in a dream world. Why would new and knowledgeable editors come to DMOZ to list sites when they can go to projects on the rise, like Wikipedia, and ply their volunteer trade. I was interested in adding all the schools in that Australian state, your method would have prevented that unless I was willing to list 1000 other sites of no interest to me. Someone else added all the walking sites in Australia. I did all the fishing sites in another state. None of these things could happen under your method - it is crap pure and simple, and highly destructive to the project's objective, which is to list as many quality sites as possible. Far more destructive than the corruption that exists.

 

It would be helpful if we could continue talking about that real world ODP rather than your straw man, “everything you could possibly imagine is wrong with it”, alternative universe ODP. Thanks for your cooperation.

 

You could have still added all the sites to the submission line and all those sites would have still been added, the difference possibly could have been a day or so. I don't think that you are going to claim DMOZ is so up to date that it can not tolerate a delay of couple of hours in listing of some sites.

The only thing wrong with DMOZ is, that is run by a joint committee of morons and crooks. Morons are happy with their titles and crooks with the benefits.

 

It would seem that this erroneous statement proves your claims to have an ODP logon false. Gworld telling a lie….I can’t believe it.

 

Just compare the number of postings in internal forum about any subject to the number of postings in here. There is more posting in a hour here than there is in a week in internal forum.
But don't let me stop you from posting, I enjoy your postings since I do not want people think that I exaggerate when I post that many of "senior" editors IQ is lower than room temperature.

By the way, what happened to the editor who was clearly abusing DMOZ? Still continuing to abuse the directory? Don't forget to deny the editor the pay raise and vacation for next year.

 

We went through this before - the sites would have been added to the submission lines and because it would have been necessary to go through the 1000 ahead of them first they would still be in those submission lines. It doesn't work. Go back to the drawing board and come up with something better.

 

That is what you claim, I think with many new editors joining, there will be no submission lines. It seems the biggest problem for editors with my system is that they are not ready to lose their "privilege" of having the possibility to abuse the directory.

 

Wow. Thats original. I have never heard that one before.

You seem to be under the impression that I am somehow answerable to you. You are the one one claiming evidence of wide spread abuse by senior editors, You are that one who is claiming evidence of said abuse, You are the one who should be producing the goods.

 

Uhh, no...that's not true either...

At least your lies used to sound plausable...now it just sounds like the rantings of a bitter old man with too much time on his hands and a large hole in his tinfoil hat...

 

And you expect that people should believe you.

The editors that have access to internal forum know that you lie and others have seen the post that by your own admission, you are nothing more than a puppet.

Are you still claiming that you are listing illegal porn web sites in order to improve the future of mankind?

You are not answerable to me but are you answerable to all other editors that their volunteer work is used to promote illegal porn and gambling sites? Obviously you feel no responsibility toward the honest editors. I posted the proof about the abuse but it is clear that contrary to all your big talk, you have no power to do anything about it. Just run home now, little boy before Meta get mad and spank you. May be you can tell all your friends that you are a big shot DMOZ editor but I think it became very clear that we are just dealing with another puppet like Sid.

 

The day Google finally drops DMOZ, will be the end of "editor corruption."

First, no one will care to pay for a listing, because no one will care whether or not they are listed.

Second, editors themselves will not care whether their own sites are listed.

Third, the queues might even be eventually reduced to zero, because no one will bother to submit their sites for inclusion.

All the editors say that they look forward to the day that Google drops the ODP. No more leprosy-infected webmasters to bother them. They will be free at last, to "build categories" as they see fit.

I think that's the solution of all of the ODP's ills.

 

When Google moved their directory off the main page and effectively hid it the value of DMOZ to webmasters dropped considerably. It does not appear to have any weighting when it comes to PR either. And PR attached to clones is discounted. Google does not display categories in response to searches. The only thing a webmaster actually gets from a DMOZ listing is the possible direct referrals and how many of those do they actually get? One or two a month if they are extremely lucky. It is just another free link and it should not be attracting the attention it does.

Its value really is marginal now. I put the names of some small towns I created as locality categories into a Google search. Zero, nothing, from DMOZ. But lots of directories and information from other sources. And only listing the unique sites from the small towns has no effect on them either - the results don't push them to the top of the results.

I wonder, to some extent, why I bothered. Few people use the directory direct, it does nothing to search results, and there is no link to the category in those results. What is the point of volunteering to have no impact at all.

It was interesting what did come up. Because that included information from volunteer projects. And the difference - those other links were content rich and not just a page of links. If you are after promotion as a webmaster then DMOZ is a dead loss, forget it, and as an editor your work is completely ignord. If you are a volunteer then you still want your work to make a difference. Editing in DMOZ will not make any difference at all, even in the tiny niche areas. So gworld's "real" volunteers are not going to be interested. They are producing a product no-one is interested in buying any more because there are better things out there, volunteer projects that do matter and do have an impact. So the idea that a mass of volunteers are going to suddenly descend on DMOZ and clear over a million waiting submissions because gworld's methods are adopted is nonsense - changing the methods of listing in his way may potentially eliminate a small amount of corruption in those areas where it is a problem but it will not attract an influx of editors to edit districts around Canberra. What would their volunteer effort gain anyone - nothing whatsoever. I only did it because no-one else could be bothered and it looked a mess.

This is why I don't think it is enough, or even a priority, to fix what is clearly wrong with DMOZ as it stands. You could open up editor applications through innovative methods, you could fix every guideline, you could revitalise editors by changing the Admins, you could boost editor numbers and productivity temporarily through motivational techniques. But all this would do is provide a temporary stay. To survive DMOZ needs to re-invent itself in a way that greatly increases its relevance as a source of information and gives reason for volunteers to invest time and effort into it. It still has 7000 people on the books and email addresses for tens of thousands more. That is a huge asset if it were to reinvent itself.

Try this

http://dmoz.org/Regional/North_America/United_States/Mississippi/Localities/M/McComb/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McComb,_Mississippi
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2006-06,GGLG:en&q=McComb

If you were a "real" volunteer interested in McComb where would you think your efforts are going to be most useful. If you are a surfer interested in McComb whose data is going to be more useful. But more's the point, whose data are you going to find. The challenge, for DMOZ survival, is to reinvent itself so that when you do that search it is just as relevant as Wiki in terms of the results. I mean this is volunteer projects competing for volunteers but whereas Wiki makes it easy for the volunteer DMOZ makes it difficult. Being No 1 on a Google search for McComb means the volunteers are attracted, and one click and I can edit it without even logging on. It doesn't look vandalised to me or full of corruption. Not that if you opened up the DMOZ page quite so widely it wouldn't be full of trash in no time.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Brilliant. I couldn't have said it better.

 

In contrast, I think my contribution to Google Co-op might be useful.

The Co-op looks like it's taking off exponentially. More and more people everyday.

Now is the time to join and help out.

 

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/admin.htm

It just amused me...