DMOZ is heavily biased

I normally ignore all the usual complaints about dmoz and the editors, mostly because the complaints are often little more than a whinge about 'why isn't my site included ..' blah, blah.

However, I am currently working on a project which involves me pouring over some dmoz listings and to be honest, I am rather shocked at the level of bias, well, what I perceive as bias, within the content.

America has a population in the range of 300million, yet has a huge number of entries under than the category of webhosting compared to ... the rest of the world ... um, population in the region of 5.97billion.

Rather unsettling.

 

I would have to agree, they do pass over a lot of websites.

I'm not complaining about dmoz... but I have been trying to get listed there for over a year now, I guess my site isn't good enough for them, Sad thing, is they turn you down but never contact you, or tell you what you are doing wrong, they could atleast point people to the correct path.

As it is now even if you follow there instructions to the T. there is a huge chance you will never appear in DMOZ. Heh, even with all that to get me down I still continue to try.

 

We have discussed this in many of the other threads here at DP and I always come to the same conclusion, they need to fire all of the editors.

After they fire all of the editors, they then can......

Install automation that communicates with webmasters about their submissions and allow users to vote sites up and down sort of like we do on the forum with reputation.

AOL will do something with this "database" soon and firing the editors and replacing them with automation is the only solution

 

They claim they are fair and just, read this and tell me where they are failing folks

http://dmoz.org/guidelines/

Just because they never communicate with any one does not mean they are not working their asses off on your behalf

 

http://dmoz.org/guidelines/conflict.html

The above page will settle this issue once and for all, there is no conflict of interest by editors at DMOZ

 

Many people think this way until they have problems to have their own sites included.

DMOZ is a joke IMO.

 

I can see how that could happen. The thing is, I am not trying to get a particular site included. It is an observation entirely independent of seeking inclusion.

When dmoz kicked off, it had high ideals about quality and human edited listings which would help define the web by removing a lot of junk sites. To a great degree this has occurred, however, either the swing towards filtration has gone to far or, more likely, the dmoz editorial fraternity has been infiltrated by the very people dmoz sought to exclude.

Seems like competition is being suppressed by this new breed and the listings are now spamdered -- instead of having to spam directories with lots of useless sites, another philosophy could be to simply squash the opposition a.l.a. M$ -- spamdered.

 

It doesn't mean they are, either -- they may be working their asses off (well... some of them) but don't count on it being on anyone's behalf except their own.

 

Ditto.

Indeed, that's one of the things I dislike about DMOZ editors (at least or especially the Resourceless Zone variety): They attribute any criticism to sour grapes -- either "you're saying that because your site was rejected" or "you're saying that because you were rejected as an editor" -- apparently "you're saying that because it's true or you sincerely believe it to be true" just isn't one of the offical options for DMOZ.

 

But with the links I provided we have an open and shut case, they are open to submissions and are doing their jobs just fine.

That is what the pages say that I linked to Minstrel.....Are we being a bit hard on DMOZ for some odd reason today

 

oooohhh, scary!

 

Oh yeah... why, yes... yes, they ARE doing a bang up job. I see it all clearly now. How could we all have been so wrong all this time?

No more than any other day. I say, "Nuke DMOZ!"

 

So it seems judging from all of the threads that exist complaining about the shortcomings within the dmoz system.

 

Yes Gentleman, but since Digital Point is an open forum both points of view must be presented here, we must give the other side a chance to explain their views fairly.

So when those who wish to defend DMOZ come into this thread please be gracious and let them present their arguments without attacking them.

 

To add to the reading material supplied by Anthony, try these:

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=9680

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=8327

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=10043

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=3462

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=3455

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2742

...this is just a sample and only from DigitalPoint: search further here or go to any other forum and you'll find hundreds.

Oh, but I forgot... according to the Resourceless Zone, all those hundreds of people are wrong.

My mistake. Please ignore this post and refer to the propoganda... I mean wisdom of the Resourceless Zone editors instead.

 

Oh... you mean the way they do it at the Resourceless Zone?

 

Well they have a right to come here to argue their case and you know that Minstrel, maybe one day they will and I hope we have a fair debate when they do

 

Nonsense. We already have a forum for fair DMOZ debate -- they call it the Resourceless Zone

If they try that stuff here, we'll cut their balls off