Is DMOZ even relevant anymore??

i always get error in description of my blog

 

Without wanting to be disrespectful to other sites in this directory, I think some of the sites in there would be of very little use to anyone, whereas our site would be very useful to many people who are shopping for office furniture in the UK. Many of the products we offer aren't found on other sites. I take your point about spam and I can imagine how much rubbish you must have to trawl through to find genuine sites.

Do sites ever get blacklisted in DMoz, in that any submissions of that site automatically get put in the trash? Can't think why ours would've but I first submitted it about 5 or 6 years ago, and have resubmitted several times since. It must've been reviewed by someone if it's there.

The description we used was very short and descriptive and completely non-marketing with no keywords stuffed in. I was very careful to ensure this.

 

Yes, if someone has offered a bribe to an editor, and I'd imagine there are other reasons, but it has to be well earned. I'm not sure, so it would be better for a meta editor to answer that to be accurate. I don't want to give you wrong information.
http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/spamming.html

Then, most likely, it's a scarcity of editors in that area. Why don't you apply to edit in that area? It's a small category that's suitable for a new editor.
http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/
http://www.dmoz.org/help/become.html

It would be easy to maintain, and I'm sure you could find more sites for it (even if they are competitors)

And yes, you are allowed to list your own site, if it meets the Directorys criteria for listing, but you have to treat all sites (including your own) impartially as an editor, and of course, declare your afilliation to it on your editing dashboard. Those who don't are removed as editors, and if your site doesn't belong, it will be removed also. You can always ask other editors for their advice/ opinion, we help each other learn.

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

Sorry for all the links. Hopefully, you'll stay and take care of that category, or apply for more categories. You edit as much or as little as you desire to. It's your free time.

 

Your site can be labeled as "non-listable". Such a comment (or label), is very much like a ban. If your site was reviewed and discarded by an editor. Every editor which review the site after that will see his comments. Including any suggestion like "don't list this site".
DMOZ editor say there is lot of submissions and to few editors to take care of them. In such conditions, a site commented as non-listable is very unlikely to be listed.

 

its that very mindset that likely stops the ODP from actually giving feedback to the submitter.

Just think, if it was rejected for having a blacked about page, and that about page was filled in... what do ya know, IT'S LISTABLE, and as such worthy of being submitted again.

 

Some sites are declined because they're missing vital content - but the suggestion guidelines prohibit their suggestion anyway. By all means suggest them again when they're complete.

Yes I know websites evolve with time, but there's a big difference between a fully working website that's evolving and one full of coming soon pages. I declined a UK wide business directory today because it largely consisted of empty categories - and there was no way of knowing that before clicking the category links .

Many sites are declined because they're mirrors or follow a business model that's barred in our Editor Guidelines. No amount of titivation and re-suggestion is going to change our minds.

 

Unfortunately, if you site got a bad label/comment there is little chance it will be reviewed again by the same or any other editor.

If you are going to submit your site to DMOZ do it only when you are really sure it is bullet proof. Any wrong move will cost you too much.

Once you submit it, forget it. If you are victim of a lazy or a dishonest editor you are lost. The same goes for an abandoned category.

 

i havent bothered submitting to dmoz for years - i'd rather not waste my time. none of my sites have ever been accepted despite them all been extremely high quality.

 

submit my website to dmoz, but no response.

 

I did actually give that a try and was clear about sites I run but I haven't recieved a response. Was a couple of weeks ago now.

I asked about the blacklisting thing because I worry a competitor may have run this category at some time or another and blacklisted our site, are there measures in place to stop this? I've certainly never tried to bribe an editor and I can't think of any other rules we could possibly have broken.

I think the point about there being no editor is probably the most likely one.

 

Google scrapes the DMOZ directory and slaps its own name on it along with adding a pagerank statistic to each site. DMOZ is not relevant and is just duplicate content.

 

That's a very common theme, but no normal editor can a ban a site, it takes a meta editor to do that, and only for very good reason. Yes, there are many measures of keeping an eye on editors. In fact, every editor has the means to investigate any editor and report any kind of abuse.

Also, the public can file an abuse report at any time, if they have some proof of wrong doing, but, not getting a site suggestion accepted isn't considered abuse.

 

Abuse reports get sent to the very people they are written about...

Which is evidence of the abuse system being completely worthless as it is...

And on the off chance an abuse report is actually looked at, should the meta editor believe it and get a few other meta editors to believe it too, that is enough to ban any other member of the directory! NO PROOF IS NEEDED! Only the word of a few meta editors. FAIRNESS is not a part of the ODP, and while you can disagree all you want too, I have to stand behind my confidentiality guidelines

 

I know about two editors banned from DMOZ. One of them got a ban for nominating himself in the "Editor Awards" (some kind of recognition for editors). The other got his account banned for bookmarking a website he should never have bookmarked.

Being politically correct in DMOZ is better than following the actual rules. Some people is banned for small things while others get away with it.

 

You are either misinformed, or telling a blatant lie.

a. The Editor Awards programs that we have are designed for fun, in addition to recognising editors contributions, there are some very unusual awards. Nominating yourself for these awards would in no way result in a ban.

b. Bookmarking a site would in no way get your editing permission removed. You can bookmark what ever you like, that is why you are assigned Editors Bookmarks. They are for your personal use, your content and you can place into them anything you wish.

Now if by "bookmarked" you mean publishing a site in the main directory, then obviously there is more to this and I wont discuss this further.

I think that you need to check your sources of information as the statement is totally incorrect.

 

snooks is correct. lol Where do you guys get such silliness?

In fact, when somebody nominates themselves (usually for some off the wall thing), we have a lot of fun with it.

And as Snooks says, our Bookmarks category is every editors playground. We can use it to try out the bells and whistles of our Editing Dashboard to see what things do, we can build examples of new categories that we'd like to discuss creating, we can store helpful tools in it, or sites that are good mining resources for new sites, ect.

And nothing we do in our Bookmarks effects the live Directory. We can add or delete anything we create in them.

 

I would say that proof is usually pretty obvious, and any editor can investigate any other editor, if they know how.

Who says there has to be fairness? We all know the rules, and just like every site is added and kept in the Directory at the editor communities sole discretion, so too are editors.

No editor has a right to be here, we are granted editing permissions. If we do something we shouldn't do, those editing permissions can be removed just as quickly. We are editors at the sole discretion of ourselves and the Directory.

You know, the same is true if an editor is granted higher editing permissions, they can be demoted for either not using their responsibilities correctly, or resign from the position because it's more than they want to take on.

Editors have a great deal of freedom within the Directory, but they have to be earned, they're not given out as favors. I've seen meta editors resign and I've seen one removed, there is no favoritism, nor is there any buddy system, cross a line and you're all done, no matter who you are.

I use my editing name in here, but others don't, because it's easy to forget where the lines are in the heat of an exchange, or because they don't want to have to worry about it. I know where the lines are, and I've come very close to crossing them lately. If I'm suddenly no longer an editor, I'll know I misjudged, but I won't whine about it, I'll accept it.

 

@snooks: You can deny whatever you want. But that won't change facts. The first editor got banned because a bunch of editors started criticizing his work after he applied for the award. He tried to defend his work in a couple of categories. But this guys keep posting in some internal forum. Blaming him for errors in categories he couldn't edit. The whole thing got he banned. As for the other one, he bookmarked a site already listed (shoemoney's website). Then he suggested that DMOZ should investigate the whole matter. Then he got banned.
Mafia-like behaviour.

 

ACTUALLY, as the reasons are confidential, you too have no way of knowing, unless you ask the editors themselves, many of which will give equally silly reasons why they got let go... so who are you going to believe, the ex-editors with nothing to hide, or the meta editors with their secrets?

Either way though, YOU can not judge one way or the other can you? In fact, you and Snooks are equally clueless on the matter at hand, and don't even know who you are talking about, so how can you say one way or another...

Hearsay is one thing, and is something that caprichoso is cerrainly guilty of... but saying that what he is saying is nothing but downright lies, unless you know something and are not sharing...so again, who is the bad light shining on?

the ODP...

 

I am new to this forum, but i have tried to get listed to DMOZ. Prehaps DMOZ may read into some of the feedback given and make the site look better, and also make it easier to list or actually try and make it into a business where you have dedicated support and administrators....listen to the market...