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.

Dmoz Lottery

Discussion in 'ODP / DMOZ' started by seoindia, Aug 17, 2005.

  1. #1
    Does Dmoz ban a certain IP from which it receives regular submissions. I am very surprised that during the last 6 months whatever site i have submiited none of them got added and whats more strange is that the sites which got added in that category where i submitted are much worse site than mine ones. Really Dmoz is like a Lottery.
    SEMrush
     
    seoindia, Aug 17, 2005 IP
    SEMrush
  2. Alucard

    Alucard Peon

    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    98
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    There are many ways that the ODP tries to protect itself from malicious submitters. However, it is highly unlikely that one or two submissions would cause any of that to trigger.

    Submissions take anywhere from 2 minutes to well over 2 years to get reviewed, depending on which part of the directory the site belongs (note I said "belongs", not "is submitted to")

    As for the lottery, from the perspective of a web professional, I think that is a good analogy. Lotteries say "look how many prizes we give out - we make people rich!" while the poor person who buys a ticket every week and never wins says "what good is it, anyway? I never win" - but they still buy tickets.
    And yes, luck probably plays a factor as to when the site will be reviewed. Unlike the lottery, though, while you have no control over the process, you can increase your odds of being successful.

    Standard ODP policy: Submit once to what you feel is the best category for the site. Do not submit multiple pages per business. If you do not see it listed after about six months, submit once more (just to make sure that the submission got through). Read the submission guidelines about how to form a good submission - editors' eyes are caught by those that actually avoid hype and keywords in both the title and the description.

    And now I turn this thread over to the usual cast of ODP-cynics :)
     
    Alucard, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  3. Jim_Westergren

    Jim_Westergren Notable Member

    Messages:
    1,882
    Likes Received:
    247
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #3
    Lottery, yeah exactly!.

    I have 10 sites. The two absolute worst ones got listed. And really unfortunately they are hosted on a freehosting subdomain and I cannot even put a 301 on it. The second one of these I didn't even submit as it was so unimportant, and it got listed. While my business site has not been listed ...

    That is lottery.
     
    Jim_Westergren, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  4. seoindia

    seoindia Notable Member

    Messages:
    1,684
    Likes Received:
    101
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #4
    Yeh thats what i am trying to say as well. Forget of the guidelines there are many worse sites listed in dmoz and everybody knows why, but there should be some policy in monitoring editors or google should look into it and try to find out a solution in some manner.
     
    seoindia, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  5. Jim_Westergren

    Jim_Westergren Notable Member

    Messages:
    1,882
    Likes Received:
    247
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #5
    Yes, I can only think of two options:

    1. DMOZ being taken over (bought), all backlog handled forcefully and 20% junk deleted. Then set up as pay-for-inclusion or only real quality sites included. Paid editors.
    2. Google sets up it's own directory and DMOZ is all useless and forgotten in about a year later.

    Which one do you think will happen?
     
    Jim_Westergren, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  6. seoindia

    seoindia Notable Member

    Messages:
    1,684
    Likes Received:
    101
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #6
    Good suggestion friend, i think 2nd one is a good and more appropriate solutions and if that happens it will end frustration of not getting into dmoz and blaming that dmoz editors are corrupt. If dmoz become paid than its value will be lost and SEO will become too much costly because if dmoz do this everybody will follow, already its getting very difficult to find good free directories to submit to where a sites actually gets added.

    Google must either completly take over dmoz and make a appropriate plan for submission review or it must stop giving excessive value to dmoz.
     
    seoindia, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  7. Alucard

    Alucard Peon

    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    98
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    Why do you think they must do that?
     
    Alucard, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  8. zman

    zman Peon

    Messages:
    3,113
    Likes Received:
    180
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    I have 15 sites and the 3 worst ones got listed. That is why I give DMOZ no value for the most part.
     
    zman, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  9. Blogmaster

    Blogmaster Blood Type Dating Affiliate Manager

    Messages:
    25,924
    Likes Received:
    1,354
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    380
    #9
    I have 5 out of my 15 sites listed. Also about 25% of my clients are listed. I can honestly say that the quality of a category does depend on the editor for the most part. It is very hard to generalize things, because I have seen some really good editing jobs with categories that were so much more useful than the regular search engine results. When you say that the worst ones got listed, I have seen indications before that some editors prefer listing bad sites, especially when they are your competition and rather list some sites that don't threaten them as much.
     
    Blogmaster, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  10. zman

    zman Peon

    Messages:
    3,113
    Likes Received:
    180
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    I think it is very possible this could be the case. That is the problem with DMOZ, money is involved and where money is involved so shall be corruption.
     
    zman, Aug 17, 2005 IP
    Blogmaster likes this.
  11. Jim_Westergren

    Jim_Westergren Notable Member

    Messages:
    1,882
    Likes Received:
    247
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #11
    Actually for the categories they are good, but for me they are useless.
     
    Jim_Westergren, Aug 17, 2005 IP
    Alucard likes this.
  12. Blogmaster

    Blogmaster Blood Type Dating Affiliate Manager

    Messages:
    25,924
    Likes Received:
    1,354
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    380
    #12
    Exactly, the overall difference between categories with commercial value and those without or only little commercial value is very high.
     
    Blogmaster, Aug 17, 2005 IP
    zman likes this.
  13. zman

    zman Peon

    Messages:
    3,113
    Likes Received:
    180
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #13
    When I say worst I mean downright horrible sites.

    One is the first site I ever built. It was a miserable attempt but for some reason it got into DMOZ only a couple of weeks after I submitted it about a year and a half ago. I had no alt tags, no inbound links, no PR, no page title, was nowhere in the first 100 results for any keywords or combos, yet got listed right away.

    Now I have a couple sites hitting top 3 results on Yahoo, G, and MSN for almost all of my targeted keywords and DMOZ couldnt care less.
     
    zman, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  14. Blogmaster

    Blogmaster Blood Type Dating Affiliate Manager

    Messages:
    25,924
    Likes Received:
    1,354
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    380
    #14
    I have seen a few hobby sites owned by some editors which made me feel like a kick ass designer :D (no offense, I outsource design)
    Maybe it makes some of them feel better about themselves. From what I understand though, it doesn't matter how bad or good the design is though.

    I have my little mini directory and when I look for new sites, I want sites that offer something that is not already in my directory. I guess that is what you call unique content, in order to make the directory richer overall. The problem is when you pick the next best thing rather than look around for something better.
     
    Blogmaster, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  15. Alucard

    Alucard Peon

    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    98
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #15
    Sites are evaluated based on content, not on design, you are right.

    And yes, even though there are guidelines and standards and peer review processes, there will be some variability between listings. I don't think that is avoidable.

    And if the ODP has listed a site which has no other rankings in SEs, and no tags and no.. well, all the things that make it visible to search engines, then the way I see it, in that regard the ODP has done its job, I guess.
     
    Alucard, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  16. zman

    zman Peon

    Messages:
    3,113
    Likes Received:
    180
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #16
    Maybe I didnt post that right. I am not saying that I am being ignored because of design, I am simply suggesting that the more a site looks like it will not rank better than a "competitors" site, the higher the chances are of it getting into DMOZ.

    My sites that do rank well are being ignored. My sites that suck got right in. I submitted several to the same category and the worst got in. What does this tell us?
     
    zman, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  17. Birdie

    Birdie Peon

    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    18
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #17
    Maybe those of yours being "ignored" are not eligible for a listing. The two sites in you signature are not listable (lack of content and affiliate site)
    It tells me that you are trying to scam DMOZ - have you actually read the guidelines about "related" sites and NOT submitting them.
     
    Birdie, Aug 17, 2005 IP
    Alucard likes this.
  18. zman

    zman Peon

    Messages:
    3,113
    Likes Received:
    180
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #18
    The two in my sig are new and being worked on. Hence them being in my sig. I havent even submitted them.

    The sites I have submitted are far better than most in the category I have been trying to get them into.
     
    zman, Aug 17, 2005 IP
  19. sarahk

    sarahk iTamer Staff

    Messages:
    27,276
    Likes Received:
    4,186
    Best Answers:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    665
    #19
    Ok, shoot me for being lazy.

    But I have a few minutes, just want to edit 1 or 2 submissions so I log in. Confronted by a list of 18 (but the queue is 300+) I'll scan down and pick the easy ones. How are they easy?
    1. The subject might be something I know,
    2. the description looks good (ie less actual editing needed),
    3. the title is right etc.
    4. It's in the right category
    Eventually that category just gets down to the submissions that make me groan, so I'll look for another category that needs work. I'm not getting the list down to zero anytime soon so why shouldn't I focus on the sites that make it easy for me?

    As a webmaster you can't help #1 but you can with the others.

    And as for the "worst sites" being accepted. You may not like them but as with anything, consider it from the user's point of view. Your perfect site might look like "Mr Slick the conman" while your cheap and nasty site might look authentic with good, unbiased info.

    Sarah
     
    sarahk, Aug 17, 2005 IP
    Alucard likes this.
  20. zman

    zman Peon

    Messages:
    3,113
    Likes Received:
    180
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #20
    I am considering it from a users point of view. There was not and still is not anything on that site that could be considered useful. It was a practice site, my first.
     
    zman, Aug 17, 2005 IP