Where Are the Editors?

Yikes, sarahk, you are a brave soul. Thank you for your work in an area I wouldn't want to touch with a 10 foot pole.

On the other hand, personal pages don't bother me a bit, in fact I rather enjoy some of them. Sometimes too much, and I get distracted.

 

And there you see one of the strengths and at the same time weaknesses of the ODP - different editors find their interest in different areas of the directory - what some find boring and horrible, others enjoy.

The issue comes in areas where no editor feels like setting foot.... and those are the high-trafficed, high spam, and low perceived value areas.

 

I do believe that you are probably right. I believe that with this project there is an over abundance of editors in areas and not enough in others. So instead of others helping and filling in the gaps you see requests go unanswered or take months before being listed.

 

the cat. i just took over has sites in there that have been waiting to be reviewed from 2002 *shakes head*

i feel really sorry for the owners of those sites, and understand the frustration. There's a real need for editors, but its reassuring to know that the overall level of activity means that more often than not, ODP is still a good alernative to googling.

 

ODP is not a good alternative to Googling. If Google didn't exist, you would likely never have heard of DMOZ and almost certainly would not have bothered to apply as an editor.

 

This is true. DMOZ only exists like it is because of search engines such as Google and most of all the people like us. Sometimes websites get so large that they forget what made them great. It is the people who make them great. The same people that visit their sites everyday. There are some really well run sites on the Internet such as DigitalPoint for example where you can go and enjoy your visits and not worry about what one of the 6 million rules you are going to violate today because you didnt know about it. I know of a one company in particular for which I wont name that does have an overbloated ego and tends to forget their visitors are making them who they are.

 

The reliance of ODP (or any other website, for that matter) on Google is not an argument for or against the value of a website. Projects like DMOZ (but also JoeAnt and co, which I also edit - and use) have intrinsic quality. Hence your argument doesn't back up your assertion that DMOZ (and directories like it) aren't a good alternative. They are.

 

Balderdash.

Nobody except a DMOZ editor ever uses DMOZ to find anything.

 

Popularity's not proof of intrinsic value though, so what you're saying is still untrue. A majority of people use IE despite there being plenty of better alternatives.

 

Once again, completely missing the point.

The only people who have ever even heard of DMOZ are DMOZ editors and webmasters trying to improve their Google rankings. The average net user searching for information, products, or services will use one of the major search engines to do so. They will not use DMOZ because (1) they don't know it exists, and (2) if theyu did know it existed it isn't nearly sufficiently representative of the content of the net to be useful.

The webmaster group doesn't use DMOZ to find sites other than their own.

No one but a DMOZ editor would ever use DMOZ to actually search for anything.

 

the point you made was: "ODP is not a good alternative to Googling."

my point is that it is, whether or not it is perceived as one and used as one. You must have forgotten what we were talking about.

 

How can it be a good source or better than googling. The ODP is bias and sites are placed in the directory based on what the editors deem to be of high standard. Last time I checked I dont believe that DMOZ speaks for the public even though some of the editors with their god complex feel as if they do and that they know what is best for all of the internet, even though they cant even clean up their own shop.

See that statement you made really makes me believe that the editors Not ALL but several now are getting the feeling that their directory ODP is better than the google search engine.....

 

That's correct: ODP/DMOZ is NOT a good alternative to Googling. It doesn't return nearly the number or quality of relative links (even when the DMOZ search isn't broken).

So you are saying that even though no one thinks DMOZ is a useful alternative to Google and no one uses DMOZ for that purpose, it is nonetheless a good alternative to Google? And this is based on what exactly?

I know you think being a DMOZ editor for a few days makes you an expert in something (not certain what, however), but may I suggest you re-take Logic 101?

Have you applied for Moderator status at the Resourceless Zone yet? I think you'd fit right in.

 

Minstrel, do you have any evidence to back up this claim?

I can counter it, because I know of several people from different walks of life who, once made aware of its existence, use the ODP regularly to find stuff, and they are not, nor have any interest in becoming editors.

I think there are, and should be, many ways to find data on the internet. I think that the public has become too conditioned to just using one search engine. It may not be a viable alternative for you, minstrel, and that is fine. But it may just be a viable alternative for others.

I believe that anyone who is just using one method to find information is limiting themselves. I feel that Google and the ODP complement each other.

 

I gave a random example at http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=330197#post330197 where I think people would prefer the ODP results to that of Google (if they knew about it). There are countless others.

I have had a quite a few people that I have shown the ODP to for a particular search that they are doing come back to me and say how focused and relevant the ODP category they use was for what they wanted.

It certainly doesn't apply to all cases - I use search engines a lot myself. I just think you folks are getting into trying to prove it's black or white when it's a shade somewhere in between. If you have the time and desire to go down that road, then fine, but it seems like it's a lost cause on both sides.

 

Alucard, I have on several occasions here and elsewhere asked the question, "Does anyone who is NOT a DMOZ editor ever use DMOZ to search for ANYTHING?" and I have yet to get an affirmative answer from anyone who wasn't a DMOZ editor. That's what my claim is based on.

As for complementing Google, I would counter that anything in DMOZ is in Google and more. But the reverse is not true: There is a LOT in Google that is not in DMOZ and Google does a far better job of returning relevant results and discarding dead links.

 

I won't disagree with that. Indeed, DMOZ doesn't profess to be a search engine, after all. My comments were in response to Bradley's preposterous claim that is was a good alternative (well, that and his unprovoked personal attacks on me).

 

Ah, ok, so your sample set is from people who come to the DP forums.... well, apart from site owners, SEOs and ODP editors, who would KNOW about this forum?

So I guess that doesn't surprise me. Consider my offering of adecdotal evidence to the contrary, then