You will find that those telling us all about the benefits of directories are the owners of those directories. Particularly the snake oil merchants AKA pay for inclusion directory owners. There are two possibilities. Google are liars, and are not very good at what they do OR they treat these links as the crap they are and that links from all but a few directories are devalued to a level to a level to that they are either worthless or or near worthless. Here is what google says, you decide for yourself
Google also says 'submit to directories' in their guidelines : http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769 I know they haven't said you can submit to 'general directories' like the ones we see here.. but isn't yahoo a pay for inclusion/review directory neb?
Yahoo is the great granddaddy of all directories. Its original purpose was, and remains to a certain extent (in so far as a directory can in 2008) a resource for real people to use. To compare Yahoo, the ODP and a few other comprehensive directories to 99.99% of the content free worthless pay for inclusion general directories is non-sensical. The vast majority of directories you see today are the 2008 version of the 2002 link farm, be it with slightly prettier packaging.
Agreed with what you are saying about yahoo .. the non-sensical comparison ) and to and extent with directories of 2008 being good looking step brothers of 2002 link farms.. So are you fine with an effort that tries to create another resource for real people to use? It might be a free attempt or a pay for review like yahoo..
Yes, yes ,yes. But it would take massive resources, with limited potential for returns or an entirely new approach.