Future of Dmoz?

Hi,

I was doing some research using dmoz database and found that many of the sites were not updated for a long time. Some sites were expired. problems with the editors?. I seriously cant see any future in dmoz.

Why should we bow down to dmoz since everyone is complaining about it?

I really hope someone can come up with something better. maybe a database with internal search engine to look for changes in the content. If content not changed within 2 or 3 months or expired domain, delete the entry.

just my thoughts..

 

it's hard to manage over 5 million websites with only 70,000 editors when they are already busy reviewing and adding sites to the database.

i don't think they will come up with such program and integrate it into the database...i don't this dmoz itself is compatible to such modifications

 

Many sites are expired, sites expire or are abandoned every day. It is a constant battle trying to insure that all of them are removed in a timely manner but it is being fought daily. If you see a listing that is dead or of poor quality and you think it needs more immediate attention, feel free to click the "Update Listing" link at the top of the category, follow the prompts and let us know about it. "Updates" are a higher priority to most editors and usually those get handled fairly quickly. Your help is much appreciated.

I have heard that for years, yet the directory continues to grow and be used. I hope that the sites that get abandoned and/or expire doesn't mean the hundereds of thousands of working urls listed aren't disregarded.

Sorry, I missed the law requiring anyone to use or suggest a site to dmoz? No one is twisting anyone's arm and forcing them against their will to suggest sites to dmoz. There are many other directories available, most of them have their own policies that make them more appealing and beneficial to different people. Everyone is free to use and help build any directory they choose and no one is being forced to "bow down to dmoz".

The dmoz model works well for what it is intended to accopmplish. Other directories do well to meet the needs of their users. There may be better ways to build a directory to appeal to different users, maybe someday there will be one that can appeal to everyone.

 

ImBae.net .....only 70,000 editors.....

Please stop posting nonsense messages everywhere - you already got you post count up so you get your free advertising

 

Just wanted to point out that 70,000 editors accepted since it's creation. I don't know the current number of open editor accounts off the top of my head, but I believe it is closer to 8,000 (someone might be able to correct me there) but I think that is more of the ballpark.

{assuming this is referring to an internal search engine} I don't think it has much to do with the directory not being compatitble with the feature, it is more that there isn't a real need by the editors to have such a feature. The current search feature works to find categories and then drill down manually from there to find specific listings. Search engines do much better jobs at site searching, so the dmoz search feature is more of an editor aide than a true site search in that fashion. Besides searching google and limiting to dmoz results works pretty good at finding dmoz listings.

 

macdesign...lets be nice here

 

macdesign...lets be nice here

 

Used by whom? Besides DMOZ editors and Google?

Do you really think so? What do you understand that "intention" to be, exactly?

 

Sites which have not changed for years might still have a lot of usefull content. Why would we delete them?

DMOZ already has such a program, it checks for all kind of problems with listed sites. But as it is a long and complex proces it only runs several times a year.

 

These for example use all or part of the data:

Users of dmoz data

How and why they choose to use the information is up to them. Some I use personally and others I do not. There are some that use the the directory vs a search engine but I don't know why, unless you know exactly the category you need information from a Google or AOl search would be much more efficent.

Yes I do, but I also realize some don't and that is fine with me too. To each his own. I think the intention of the directory is to catalog unique and useful websites and pages through the effort of volunteers who share similar visions of helping people looking for information on the internet find what they are looking for easier and more efficiently and to freely provide their catalog to anyone who wishes to use it.

 

I wasn't talking about DMOZ clones - I meant real people.

I have yet to meet or hear of anyone other than a DMOZ editor or a friend or family member of a DMOZ editor who does that... most have never even heard of DMOZ.

And yet who actually uses it that way? See above.

 

I agree, in most cases that the vast majority of people using the data are indirectly doing so through Google or one of the other SE users of the data and the majority have no knowledge (or would care to know) of the existance of dmoz. That is something that has always puzzled me regarding the emphasis some have placed on having a listing there.

Unfortunately, editors have no control over how the downstream users display the data in their results. We only hope that what we are doing is benifical to the information seekers. Since the directory is just the data provider not the search facility, the end users (those seeking the information) are forced to use the third party search facilities and are subject to however the facility of choice decides to display the results.

 

Just wondering why you feel the need to keep posting about it then, since you are none of the above ( well apart from someone who has 'heard' about it ) ???

 

Why do you feel the need to keep reading my posts and commenting on them, since they seem to bother you?

I don't expect you to understand, shygirl. You have made it crystal clear that you lack either the capacity or the desire to do that.

So be it. I can live with that. Can you?

 

Yes Minstrel they do bother me a bit, but you missed the point luv. There is no malice intended I'm just a little confused by you.

Since in this particular thread, you seem to view Dmoz as of little consequence in it's inherant methodology and it's overall usefulness to your average surfer. In others you have time and again questioned it's real usefulness to your average webmaster in terms of how advantageous it is regarding serps, I just wondered exactly what is it about Dmoz that gets you so riled, hot and bothered. That is all I wanted to know really.

Others question all of the above for very good and very understandable reason's, for example, not being listed, being turned down for editorship, the amount of apparent credence Google gives the directory to name a few. But most have very personal and real reasons for doing so.

You seem to veer between telling everyone how little Dmoz matters, as in this thread, and then being the first one in there when the slightest little hint of 'anything' proven or unproven comes up, and it's suddenly the most important thing in the world ?

Call me an old fashioned gal, but I'm not quite sure if either you're just idly tailoring your posts to suit every individual thread,..one minute being competely dismissive of dmoz and it's editors as non-important, then the next being really agressive and annoyed about the whole thing because dmoz apparently has such an 'influence' in all things web-related and something needs to be 'done' about it. Mabye it amuses you to cause trouble ? I dunno..

But a girl likes to know where she stands, and I don't like being pissed about when I'm posting. So perhaps you'd like to elaborate for us all exactly where you stand in terms of Dmoz 'importance' ?

Is it important IYHO or is it not ? And if it isn't to you, then why keep posting about it ? Simple question really, take your time.

Then mabye the rest of us can get on with a bit of serious discussion and try to reach some answers here (accepted, debated or otherwise) without you causing trouble and strife every 2nd thread just for the hell of it ?

Ps I'd be grateful if you'd stop giving me red reps everytime I ask a question of you.

 

If you are as aware of all my posts on the subject as you claim, shygirl, perhaps you could go back and re-read them a few more times until you understand them. There's really no mystery about my opinions and no inconsistency. There even the same here at DP as they are at several other forums.

I just don't feel inclined to spend the time repeating all that for your benefit -- first, because the information is all there for you to find already (it's even all under the same forum nickname - minstrel - shouldn't be hard to find, even for you), and second, because I'm not optimistic you're ever going to understand it (as I said, it's not clear whether that's lack of capacity or lack of will).

However, I'll tell you what: when I write that chapter in my memoirs, I'll PM you, okay?

 

DMOZ has its advantages, but only as Minstrel stated for editors, friends and family members of editors. For the general public explain to me what advantage DMOZ offers. I have yet to figure that one out.

No average user goes to DMOZ to search anything. Knowing what I believe to be so, I would never use DMOZ to find anything since I have already seen in my industry sites that should not be listed, have not been updated, dead links, wrong agent/ company names or lack the unique content that I might desire as a internet surfer.

Now I am no expert on other industries nor could I speak as to the situation of those other categories but if the real estate categories are any indication, DMOZ is a mess and offers no real value for the average surfer. The only advantage IMO DMOZ offers would relate to serps benefits for those who get listed.

With this being said, I dont believe Google will be using the data from DMOZ within the next 1 to 2 years. I say let the editors have it. Only we as webmasters give DMOZ this power, if we all stopped submitting our sites, stopped asking about statis and stop giving editors a reason to believe they are more important than they are, DMOZ would go away.

We empower some of these editors into believing that DMOZ is more important than it is. As long as we continue to do this DMOZ will live forever.

 

The only people who think DMOZ is more important than it is are the webmasters. So please, yes, let them stop suggesting sites and asking for status (which btw we don't give anymore). As DMOZ editor I have many ways of finding good sites, amongst it suggestions for sites made by our visitors. Yes, we have visitors and they suggest sites (and that is what the suggest a site option is intended for, not for webmasters wanting to promote their site).

Conclusion: we finaly found something to agree on
"Webmasters please stop suggesting your sites"

 

Google own 5% of AOL and with it DMOZ. So whilst they may try to exert some influence I don't personally think they will dump it now they have an interest.

 

That assumes that they see DMOZ as a financial interest, which seems unlikely.