dmoz editor to approve spam, down and very new sites to the directory but ignore us

The category is - http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Employment/Job_Search/

some of the sites has been added;

jobs.uk.bigrecruiters.net/ fully duplicate content from other sites!

The editor even added a directory! which is down for ages!

jobdirectory.co.uk/

Another directory in the job search category!

jobsword.co.uk/

Another site which is down!

maturityworks.co.uk/

I also found couple of redirected urls and let the editor know and he removed them straight away! however he added another site recently and guess what? it's rediredting to another site as well!

oneplace.info/ is taking us to somewhere else - surreyjobs.co.uk

one more redirection!

noagenciesplease.com/ is taking us to freelancers.net

I think he has something to do with the redirections!

And a site which is not even job related, its a CV information blog type

cvindex.com/

An USA based cv information and job site in UK job search category!

cvregister.com/

So the editor includes non-related, spam, down and very new sites to the directory and ignoring our 3,5 years job site! This is not fair at all.

What can i do about this? This is definetely abuse! He shouldn't be managing this important category. Is anyone here from Dmoz who can do something about this issue?

Thank you for reading.

 

You're Jessica right?

Perhaps you didn't get the email that I sent you privately on 2011-11-06 so here's a copy:

If you think the category is that important, perhaps you'd like to apply to become an editor there yourself .

(Regular readers here will recognise the boilerplate in the email)

 

Hi Jim,

i do understand the process but i am just pointing out the corrupted editor who is still in charge.

you encouraged me to apply to be editor for this category of dmoz

thank you for your reply.

 

You must ask yourself if you really want to be listed next to such sites...in a directory that is willing to list them. It's odd that an editor will say "why not edit the cat yourself"" rather then say "OMG, that kind of crap is in our directory". Kinda makes one wonder if those sites were all added that way, or if they changed after they were added.

The editor for that category is NOT corrupt, there is no corruption in the ODP, just ask the editors there. It's like there is no war in ba sing say... the place is burning down all around them, yet they refuse to see what is right in their face.

Though, it's not all corruption... a lot of it is simply laziness, as shown in Jims reply to you. "Editors edit where they wish, when they wish and as much as they wish within the constraints of their permissions. We have no schedules or systems to force people to do work that they don't volunteer to do. "

They are not doing it for you, they are not doing it for the end user (don't let them fool you buy saying they are doing it for them), they are doing it for themselves plain and simple. There is no other reason for it, and that is backed up even by the founding members... they are ONLY in it for themselves.

Promote your site by other means, as a link in the ODP is certainly far weaker then it ever has been in the past, getting a listing does not help in rankings in any way. If it did, listed sites would not have a PR0, as many actually do (there is a thread around here someplace), and others have posted examples of no change in SERP from being listed. So again, move on, forget about the ODP, they most certainly have forgotten about you!

 

Something I missed earlier, for which I apologise. The 'corrupt' editor being vilified here only has Greenbuster permissions in the category. S/he doesn't have, and has never had, permissions to publish websites in the 'corrupt' category. I suggest that you find some other target.

I agree that the category needs work. We just need somebody to step up to the plate and volunteer to do it.

 

I won't give up I've already submitted my application to become an editor of that category.

Thank you for your help.

 

DMOZ is dead and so is all the old world internet. They are merely holding onto the last clutches of their code before things tumble down.

 

I think this conversation will never add or modify a thing. As Jim said, editors work out on a volunteer basis and they don't get paid. There is no clear time frame or rules that the editor needs to follow.

Yes, editors can make mistake or the site transformed itself into a garbage over a period of time. Who knows how the site was when the editor reviewed it? May be few years back?

It's not a good act to point out a category / editor / site and shout on it. Every body here knows that DMOZ is like a big banyan tree and it still has some holes in it. Just my 2 cents.

 

I've stopped obsessing over DMOZ a very, very long time ago....and so should you!

 

If anyone sees sites that they do not feel meet up to DMOZ criteria, please use the update button at the top of each page and an editor will look at the site/sites mentioned. Also just to add to what Jim has said in that no category has one editor, so several hundred editors might have worked the category before and several hundred editors who spot any category with issues can change them, it's not just down to any one editor.

 

with a hundred or more editors in such a category, seems a bit odd that it's never been touched. It would seem like that would only increase the chances of it being "fixed" *shrug* I guess that falls down to "Editors edit where & what they want" which I guess in a way means that, that cat really has no editors in a matter of speaking.

 

yes someone step up and apply to edit the encyclopedia britannica.
What is hysterical is the 400 year old man who runs the encyclopedia britannica thinks that no one is good enough to edit the encyclopedia britannica because they owe it to the 4 people that read the encyclopedia britannica to give them the best quality stuff available.

Jim, time to format some more floppy disks!

 

Its enough talking about DMOZ. As they won't change, its fully worthless to start a new conversation again and again.