1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Common misconceptions about DMOZ

Discussion in 'ODP / DMOZ' started by jimnoble, Dec 4, 2011.

  1. photofox

    photofox Active Member

    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    11
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    50
    #41
    As you well know, the number on the front page is the total number of editors who have contributed to the project. Current numbers of active editor accounts is internal information from the editor forums, which is covered by the confidentiality guidelines.

    Blog posts are made/approved by AOL staff, who can post whatever information they want.

    Because most of the information you want to talk about is not for public consumption at the current time. I am not "fussing" or "bickering", I am just giving you answers that are within the scope of the guidelines editors are required to follow.
     
    photofox, Jan 12, 2012 IP
  2. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #42
    Strange that the ODP endorses false information while at the same time enforces that the truth never be talked about.

    Oh yeah, forgot, they make the rules, but in no way shape or form have to follow them in the slightest, which is why they break them openly all the freaken time. Gotcha, sorry that I forgot about how they do things.

    Again, I guess you are correct, and again I have forgotten the first rule of DMOZ....

    DOUBLE STANDARDS MUST BE HELD IN THE HIGHEST IN ALL ASPECTS OF COMMUNICATION AND ACTIONS.

    I guess my part in this conversation is over, as it's clear you are correct, and that I am in error. Thank you for once again pointing out that the double standards must be maintained in all situations concerning the ODP.

    Though I do find it odd that it's policy to break the rules for AOL staff, be misleading on the front page of the directory, then be all hush hush about the actual truth in all other instances. Odd indeed. But then, it's not my rule...
     
    Qryztufre, Jan 12, 2012 IP
  3. Anonymously

    Anonymously Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    69
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    #43
    You can say what you will, Q,I will noit argue with you, but I willcorrect you.

    Photofox pointed out that AOL staff released the blog, that AOL staff consented to those figures being published and that AOL staff will release any further figures. It is not for editors to make AOL staff decisions. AOL also continue to be happy that ALL editors who have participated ever,including yourself,should have some credit for their work and the front page figures of editors recognises that.

    I do hope you mean what you say these days and are a man of you word
     
    Anonymously, Jan 12, 2012 IP
  4. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #44
    You didn't correct me, you only reworded exactly what I said... that it's OK for AOL staff to break the rules. Why did you even bother to post? To try to make it look like I was wrong and needed to be corrected? That is VERY odd, and rather strange. Why on earth would you correct someone and say what they said as a correction?

    Yeah, done on that subject, now just curious as to your motivation in correcting an already correct statement is all.

    As we all certainly see eye to eye on the fact that AOL does not have to follow the rules that the editors have to (and that submitters have yet another set of rules that the editors don't have to follow). HA! Triple standard!
     
    Qryztufre, Jan 13, 2012 IP
  5. jimnoble

    jimnoble Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    123
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #45
    Why am I not surprised that what started out as an intended to be informative post has degenerated into the usual petty squabble between the usual two opponents :mad:?

    Neither of you is on topic for the thread and neither of you is scoring any worthwhile points, winning friends or influencing people. I suggest that you take it outside, if only to stop the pair of you from looking so pathetic in public.
     
    jimnoble, Jan 13, 2012 IP
  6. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #46
    Well, to put this into the correct topicality then...


    A few additional misconceptions about the ODP.

    DMOZ is a Human Edited Directory

    For the most part yes, but they do have bots that do some quality work and site checking. When they find a bad egg it is generally placed back in the suggestion pool to be looked at again by an editor.

    There is also at least one site that has tens of thousands of pages deep linked, which were all placed within the directory by a bot rather then a human.

    DMOZ applies the same guidelines to all site
    False. Some sites are give special treatment. For an example, the site listed above that has thousands of deeplinks (remember that deeplinks are not the norm) most of which do not contain original content.


    DMOZ guidelines apply to all editors

    No, AOL staff can completely and totally ignore any and all guidelines as they see fit.

    There are 4,976,587 sites - 93,429 editors - over 1,009,376 categories within the ODP
    No, there are significantly less then that, the real numbers are not allowed to be shared as it breaks the guidelines that the editors have to follow. However, AOL staff can feel free to break that rule and post the actual numbers (which they have done in the past).


    DMOZ is Copyright © 2012 Netscape

    Not true in the slightest, DMOZ is now owned by AOL, and has been for years. It is a complete mystery as to why they keep using the netscape name.



    There, now maybe a mod here on DP can paste that bit up on the original post, as they are all common misconceptions... now clarified. ;)
     
    Qryztufre, Jan 13, 2012 IP
  7. joeventura

    joeventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    20
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    100
    #47
    So what you are saying is DMOZ is not part of Netscape and despite all the major software upgrades that have happened in 2010 and so on, no one has gotten around to removing
    Copyright © 2012 Netscape from the website?

    Pretty wild! They have time to change the year, but not correct it.
     
    joeventura, Jan 23, 2012 IP
  8. gworld

    gworld Notable Member

    Messages:
    11,333
    Likes Received:
    614
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #48
    May be AOL is too embarrassed to put it´s name on such shitty site. :)
     
    gworld, Jan 23, 2012 IP
  9. ksb2050

    ksb2050 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    35
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #49
    It's a waste of time. You wont get in. Your site quality doesn't matter, your domain doesn't matter, anything you write does not matter. It's an exclusive club. Don't bother.

    Don't give me the quip about volunteering to edit, been there, did that, got rejected, reapplied, never got a reply. Screw them lol.

    Informational is great, but the information does not back up the actions of the site. /2cents
     
    ksb2050, Feb 3, 2012 IP
  10. joeventura

    joeventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    20
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    100
    #50
    I agree with what you said expect the part about being an exclusive club, the members of the club have long since left.
     
    joeventura, Feb 7, 2012 IP
  11. helleborine

    helleborine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    70
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #51
    Thanks, Jim, for a useful positive thread starter.
    Can I just add a couple more

    Once your site is listed, expect some traffic.
    No one uses DMOZ, and even if you get listed, which you won't, you will never, ever get a single visitor or spider from that link.

    A DMOZ listing will boost your Google ranking.
    Most of DMOZ links are dead links and hijacked domains from 1999, how high do they rank? They don't. Take a lesson from that.
     
    helleborine, Feb 19, 2012 IP
  12. arafinshaon

    arafinshaon Greenhorn

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    #52
    informative thnx :) still waiting for getting accepted in DMOZ :( lets see what happen :(
     
    arafinshaon, Apr 9, 2012 IP
  13. ksb2050

    ksb2050 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    35
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #53
    Don't hold your breath lol. You'll die before they accept you or anyone else haha
     
    ksb2050, Apr 18, 2012 IP
  14. swiftsaves

    swiftsaves Active Member

    Messages:
    692
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    85
    #54
    ok one of website got reviewed one of their listing reviewers . Reason why we got rejected was we dont putted the address on the contact us page . it was just a contact us form silly isnot it ?

    anyways Simple tip for Dmoz listing try to submit info same us other people did .
     
    swiftsaves, Apr 19, 2012 IP
  15. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #55
    DMOZ does not have listing reviewers...

    and unless you submitted to a very specific regional category, they do not need your contact information, or even a contact page! In fact, the ODP does not even have a contact page...
     
    Qryztufre, Apr 19, 2012 IP
  16. jimnoble

    jimnoble Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    123
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #56
    A few points to ponder:

    - Within Regional categories, where we list websites in their localities, we have no idea where to list a website if it has no address.

    - In some legislations (UK, Australia and maybe others), a street address is required by law on commercial websites.

    - A lack of address on a commercial website detracts from its credibility. Would you hire a plumber who conceals his base? Thought not.
     
    jimnoble, Apr 19, 2012 IP
  17. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #57

    Yes, but an address is optional, as was pointed out to me recently... (see here: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2393141&page=2 )

    The Regional category lists sites specific to a particular geographic area. The Regional category as a whole organizes sites according to their geographic focus and relevance to a particular regional population.


    So, contact info is optional...

    Is that actually criteria for the ODP though, as that is what really matters, right? I mean, you'd not hold a site back based on your own personal views of how the ODP should be ran, rather then what the guidelines actually say, right?
     
    Qryztufre, Apr 19, 2012 IP
  18. helleborine

    helleborine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    70
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #58
    None of these details matter when DMOZ's site addition rate approaches zero.
     
    helleborine, Apr 19, 2012 IP
  19. jimnoble

    jimnoble Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    123
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #59
    @any barrack room lawyers present:

    http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#include lncludes:

    Interestingly, many sites without street addresses also have anonymous WHOIS info. Even worse, it's not unusual for apparently commercial sites on the .UK TLD to have WHOIS info that says The registrant is a non-trading individual who has opted to have their address omitted from the WHOIS service. Trust inspiring, right?
     
    jimnoble, Apr 19, 2012 IP
  20. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #60
    Oh, lol. The guidelines for the ODP are WAY too complex. When I tell one digital point member that they should have an address to be listed in regional, I'm told by an editor that is not the case and get pointed to the regional guidelines. When I tell someone that an address is not needed, I get another editor telling me that it's best to have one and they point to a different area of the guidelines.

    So in reality, the guidelines of the ODP could really save a LOT of discussion and bandwidth by just leaving it with this...
    Editorial Discretion

    Please recognize that making the ODP a useful resource requires us to exercise broad editorial discretion in determining the content and structure of the directory. That discretion extends (but is not limited) to what sites to include, where in the directory sites are placed, whether and when to include more than one link to a site, when deep linking is appropriate, and the content of the title and description of the site. In addition, a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time at our sole discretion. You should not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. Please understand that an editor's exercise of discretion may not always treat all submissions equally. You may not always agree with our choices, but we hope you recognize that we do our best to make fair and reasonable decisions.


    as posting about the guidelines in any other fashion gets an editor to say that the guidelines are wrong with them pointing to the guidelines to prove it...
     
    Qryztufre, Apr 20, 2012 IP