DMOZ How To Get Listed?

How do you get listed in the DMOZ? I run a few car forums and would love to get listed in the DMOZ.

 

Try start reading this ... it may actually help you know ...

http://www.dmoz.com/help/submit.html

 

Do you have a paypal account?

 

Not funny, PortProphecy.

Editors and website owners who participate in pay-for-listing schemes are subject to removal and permanent ban from dmoz.

 

Sure it was.

If caught.

 

but y to pay? Dmoz is free.. and they for sure oneday will list you ..the day may come after yrs. But for sure u'l be lisited.

Instead of paying someone why not spend that money on adsense? .. will bring you good traffic.

 

Just list and forget about it! Do not re list the same site or it jumps to the back of the queue which might be months and months long

 

I'm assuming the length of time it takes to get listed just depends on the category? Some categories probably have more editors than others, right?

 

No, not at all. There is nothing "for sure" about it. You can sit there forever and never get listed.

 

I just applied today for two of my sites. Wish me luck

 

Oh, there will be PLENTY of time for that...

 

Yes, it does depend on the category and many other things. How many unreviewed sites, how much spam in the unreviewed, if there is an editor willing to edit in the cat at any given time. It also depends on the site content and if the submitted description was written well in the first place.

 

What amazes me about this whole scenario is if someone claims to be crafty and unethical enough to get away with a paid listing, what makes anyone believe they aren’t crafty enough to rip you off?

 

There are plenty of DMOZ editors who are crafty and unethical with free listings...

That would be pretty risky for the corrupt editor. I'm sure some of the people on the web claiming to sell listings are, in fact, scammers. But I think the scammer are not even editors. Real editors would have too much to lose to try to scam someone. Just a thought.

 

Ya, that could be true. I guess I believe that if an editor is crafty enough to get away with charging for a listing and not get caught, then they are crafty enough to scam people without getting caught, regardless of what they have to lose. In any case that is a good possibility, and that possibility should be a great deterrent for most.

 

Are there paid listings in DMOZ?

Almost certainly. If editors were not abusing their privileges then none would be removed. And some will have been caught accepting cash for listings but not all their "clients" will be uncovered and banned.

How practical is it?

Every time an editor asks for a new category to edit in their existing record is combed for evidence they are trustworthy. In order to make any kind of money from being a corrupt editor you have to get rights where webmasters want sites listed. Which means applying. Which means having your edits combed over by meta editors experienced in spotting signs of corruption. Those categories most prone to corruption (certain sectors have reputations) are carefully checked. Editors applying for those categories are given a lot of attention. Make a wrong move and you are locked out with no warning. And corrupt editors always make a mistake sooner or later. Sometimes it can take a year or more of monitoring to nail down a suspect and get the proof. But they get caught in the end because an editor on the trail of a corrupt colleague is a dog with a bone - they won't let go.

So whilst it undoubtedly happens it is generally confined to small twigs on the DMOZ structure and editors with very few and quite obscure editing rights. First time they raise their heads, e.g. by applying for a better category, they are out.

Another thing is that corrupt editors have to tout for business, it doesn't come to them. In 3.5 years of being an editor, most of that time with directory wide rights, and named at the top of a branch, I received just one offer of a bribe and that was through a PM on RZ. Take your pick from my crap jewelry store. Even had I been corruptible, that would have been worth risking my editall account for wouldn't it Instead the guy's site is permanently banned. Of course it might not be instantly banned - it might be left a short while to see if a corrupt editor does bite. Two for the price of one.

Anyone thinking of bribing an editor would be far better spending the money on marketing their site better so a DMOZ listing does not matter. Or spending nothing at all and come to webmaster forums to learn how to maximise their search engine optimisation without DMOZ from experts who will gladly advise for free.

 

This is of course assuming that the ones who supposedly are checking, are not the ones who are abusive.
In order for this to be profitable, the abusive editor must have permission in multiple categories or in the other word, be a senior editor, don't you agree?
The other problem with all your pretty words is that it is very difficult to catch anyone with unenforceable guidelines that permits anything and everything. There can be no abuse because there is always an excuse.

 

How certain are you??

 

Absolutely. Abusive senior editors have been known. And kicked out. No-one is immune. At the same time, their prominence means the scrutiny by their fellow editors is that much more intense. They all get caught. In the end.

Pretty words? That's nice of you to say so. In general terms that statement is blown apart by the fact that there are editor removals. For abuse. How do I know for sure? I've caught 'em, reported 'em, and they disappear, system works. Of course you are referring to specific circumstances, not the general situation. As you well know, my major problem with those specific circumstances is the editing practices that give rise to a strong perception of abuse regardless of whether or not it is actually happening. As you also know the branch you are concerned with holds around just 1% of listings and is not representative of the directory or editors as a whole. And finally as you also know, because it has been mentioned numerous times and you, as an editor, can see the evidence, that branch has had a lot of problems with editor abuse as evidenced by the high correlation between sites you have reported as bad listings and them being listed by removed editors.

 

I wasn't referring only to adult, such practices can be seen in any commercial areas. Let's not kid ourselves about perception of abuse, it is real and it is happening. The question you must ask yourself is, how can there be so much abuse if this abuse is not supported by admins and Metas outside of adult? If a person goes along with abuse in adult, wouldn't you agree that they will not have any moral problem with supporting abuse in other areas?