DMOZ the most important Link?

Point one out? LOL... gotta quit skimming when you read... already did.

Now I'm done with this piece of banter. Reminds me why dad said not to try to teach pigs to sing... wastes your time and just annoys the pig. Have a good one.

 

Dmoz still carries a lot of weight but good luck getting inside the cult.

 

Q, not lies, just inaccuracies. Skrenta wasn't and isn't an editor. He was one of the founders of the directory, and therefore an ex-owner. And it was the directory owners (staff working for AOL) that added all those links, not an editor. I'm sure you don't need links to verify that Mr Skrenta was a founder. If you need links about the decision-making process with Topix, and the discussions around that, I'm sure Popo can provide you snippets from the internal editor fora to show it, in case you didn't read it during your time with the ODP.

That might make the decision questionable, and many questioned it, but the fact is that no editor took part in adding those sites. In fact, many many editors have been going through and reviewing the links and removing those that do not contain relevant information. The whole issue caused a lot of debate in the editing community, but when it comes down to it, AOL own the directory and if they want to do something, then the editors can do nothing to stop them. AOL considered it a good choice to deeplink.

That was one very controversial example. It does not set a precedent for acceptable actions of editors. One rules for the owners, a different one for editors? You betcha. That is the way it is. Complain to AOL if you don't like it, but do NOT slam the editors, or start making broad-brush accusations, please.

 

Lol King of the Dark !! (if nobody knows thats Dracula spelled backwards. Some old timers were even surprised when I mentioned it to them)

Anyway what their saying is true Q. A lot of editors and ex-editors are against those listings. I for one was advised by an old mentor and a good editor ps653 not to list it or on my discretion delete. Many are in disagreements but there are things some of us foot soldiers can't do. The puppeteers are the ones who should do the job or it might be in the agreement clause when the sale went.

 

So, it's a lie that Skrenta has 10k+ listings for one of his affiliated sites and that such edits were automated?

Now tell me Mr. Jones, just who is the one lying here?

I'm not even misleading people. Skrenta's TOPIX site DOES have those links, pointing it out can not be construed as misleading at all...

Skrenta has the power to log in, he has the power to automate listings. His rank means nothing other then apparently he has the condoned power to break the rules that any other editor would have been canned for.

As a founder he should be leading by example, as that is not the case, maybe it should be looked into deeper. The fact that it's been discussed internally and that it is still an issue, then maybe that is a sign of the value of the directory... it's good for one of the leaders to log in and add his links, but it's not OK for anyone else to even list one of their sites?

Fair edits? Discretion? Human Edited directory?

Seemingly not on ANY level... after all, the general consensus was to seemingly allow those thousands of deeplinks to stand.

Preferential treatment to ANY site is not in the best interests of the end user, and that is a plain and simple fact. That is why the rest of the editors are not allowed to do it.

So while many worthy sites have to wait years to get listed, there is someone's site that gets automatically listed. Again, there is the worth of the directory.... it's a grand place to get affiliates listed for those with the power.

Though, I guess it's no wonder that so many editors feel that Webmasters are bad... look what happens when you give them the power to list sites without need to follow any of the listed guidelines.

 

True - that is no lie.

Not true. Every member of AOL staff has all of those - that rank means a LOT. Volunteer editors had nothing to do with it. he has no power to automate listings - that was programmed by staff.

He didn't list anything - from what I can tell, he approached the (salaried, not volunteer) directory staff and they came to an agreement to automate adding Topix sites into many places in the directory. Paid staff coded it, and ran it. If you approach ODP staff with a suggestion for a listing like that and can get their agreement, then I doubt that any editor could do anything about it, either. No point "re-opening it" - it got opened and the discussion was closed.

No, Q, there was no consensus reached. It was staff edict that this would happen. No debate.

Editors have never had that power. Please, Q, this is not an editor issue.

There are also sites that are linked at the bottom of every page in the ODP as well - AltaVista, A9, AOL, Ask, Clusty, Gigablast, Google, Lycos, MSN and Yahoo - really, Topix is just another example of those, but put in a different location. Are all those getting preferential treatment too?

If anybody has a site that they feel is of a similar scope and magnitude to any of the sites mentioned in the above paragraph, I encourage them to talk to the AOL staff about getting their site added. I don't know if staff would or would not be willing to repeat the experience, but using it as a poster child for how editors treat sites or how metas treat editors that extensively deeplink their own sites is a bit misplaced.... this goes far beyond the realm of the metas, believe me.

 

Q - Your childish practice of ranting against a point not made while ignoring what was actually said doesn't merit the further attention you desperately seek. I'll just point out to others that it is premature to judge you harshly, it might only be indicative of a reading disability instead of actual mental retardation.

 

I'm much more surprised when topix was sold it changed url from .com to .net and all links at DMOZ got automatically updated instead of being moved to unreviewed since website changed owner who announced changes to the content.

 

No, but it is an ODP issue...

Yes, but in a very different way. Footer links are affiliated sites, that much is obvious to most readers (though, most of those listed sites no longer use ODP data). Listings of the same site that breaks most rules of thumb is a very different matter when those listings are within the categories themselves. Especially if those links were automated.

You are seemingly correct in that it goes far beyond the realm of the Meta Team. Preferential treatment of sites comes as something from the very top. So it's really no wonder that many people precieve a trickle down effect, whether it exists or not.

So I'll stop saying that Editors allow such things to take place and start saying that AOL itself is the one that gives preferential treatment to certain sites that are affiliated with higher ranking editors.

EDIT: Got red repped saying: OK now you are just being stupid

Yet it's odd that me telling the truth is considered stupid. I am not lying, I am not misleading. TOPIX is given special treatment, and it's clear that editors defend that, and that AOL itself supports it. So yeah, stupid, but only if you are meaning me pointing it out will make a difference. DMOZ is a listing service for some individuals/sites. So stupid or not, it's a FACT. *shrug*

 

I don't think I have seen many volunteer editors that defend that decision - do you have a reference for me?

 

POINT OF ORDER: Recalling the Original Subject
This rabbit-trail about Topix has zero bearing on whether an ODP link benefits a webmaster of another site. If you have nothing to add to the subject of the thread, that's what you should say.

You have now tried to divert over 20 threads in this forum to the discussion of Topix. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/search.php?searchid=10494014&pp=25&page=1

Posting ad nauseum about a handful of pet peeves without regard to thread topic is trolling. You've voiced your opinion fwiw, so now if it isn't cogent to the subject feel free to start a thread that is, but continuing to derail other threads will eventually catch the attention of a moderator who thinks trolling deserves action. You're pushing your luck with each post.

 

I was told by an editor in this thread that I added my sites and left in a huff. I countered that if it was so bad, then what about Skrenta.

I have tried tying in the importance of an ODP link to that of affiliate listings by senior members and staff.

So, as I was not the one that actually brought up the issues of listing ones own site, and I have tried to keep the thing at least partially on topic, where does that leave you?

Oh that's right... trying to blame me for the ills associated with the ODP. Shall I look up how many times it's been that anyone has raised a point and rather then making a counter point you have resorted to name calling? Your two sidedness is once again showing.

Now if you'd not mind, maybe you could get back on topic?

You've posted 9 times in this thread and not one of them was on topic. Not even the one I quoted. Thats about me... your favorite topic on digital point.

 

Rob you are right - the original question was asked and answered, with some quite accurate information. Q , if you need another thread dedicated to the Topix thread so that we don't have to have it spill over into every other thread that mentions the ODP, please feel free to start one. But please do this if there is something new that we haven't already covered in the other multitudinous threads where the topic has already been brought up. Thanks.

 

Not a problem... so long as my history stops getting tossed into every thread. When my edit history is questioned by an editor, I should be able to point out I have done nothing against the guidelines, or something that has not been done from the beginning.

Things often do go both ways ya know...

 

I agree, Q.

 

We waited 4 months for a listing two years ago. After 23 months here is the breakdown:

Total Uniques Non Direct: 254,500
Google/Yahoo: ~235k
MSN: ~10k
Other SE: ~8k
Yahoo Directory: 600
BOTW: 400
DMOZ 125
Others: Rest

BOTW converted about 2% of the time, Yahoo 2%, DMOZ 0% with a 90% bounce rate tells us it is competitive clicks.

It's totally useless for us. I defy anyone to publish data showing DMOZ traffic converts at anywhere near the level of Yahoo, BOTW or others. The only ones that know it exists are SEOS and webmasters. The rest of the world has no idea it is there.

 

I note Alucard's remarks, but I think that listing ones own site and a couple of others and leaving is actually seen as abusive editing.

 

And how is either of you continuing this bickering even vaguely relevant to the topic? Or all the other topics you have continued this on?

 

I stated what I believed to be the facts Alucard in response to Q's question, I would have left it at that,. but you asked another question.

 

I hate dmoz because I am still in the looooooooooong queue, waiting impatiently, to be included in the directory