Not really, because before I bought Virtual web games from the old owner, it was listed on DMOZ - http://dmoz.org/Games/Online/Virtual_Pets/Directories/, which I find quite odd for some reason, since I submitted my website that same week.
I have to confess that I'm surprised there even IS a category for Games/Online/Virtual_Pets/Directories. My first thought was why would anyone want one and how many entries would anyone feel were needed there?
Probably. I'm just expressing surprise that there's one for virtual pets. I wouldn't have thought that there was enough interest to feed the category, let alone 7 entries. What do I know? I don't pretend to be an expert on virtual pets. I'm too busy with the real ones in this house.
If 5000 editors produce just 3 new sites added a year each that is 15,000 in all and 15,000 more than would otherwise have been there. 15,000 more webmasters with an entry and 15,000 less people with a gripe so probably on the plus side of the PR balance sheet. The continuing downward trend in editor numbers remains a concern and a further indicator that Admins are simply not getting the priorities right. The net increase in sites is, on the face of it, positive and seems higher than average but the lack of a significant downward step during the month suggests the primary dead link checker did not do a complete sweep and there is a major drop in the offing. Combine the two - increase in sites and decrease in editors and you have a continuing build up of the most critical issue DMOZ is not addressing - quality control problems. Every site added carries a maintenance overhead and fewer editors mean less resources to do that maintenance. The result is obvious. Editor numbers must increase at the same rate as the number of sites to make it a long-term viable project. Or the number of sites and number of categories covered by the project has to be reduced to match the ability of the editors to maintain them. Radical ideas and actions are what is needed to reverse trends but radical and DMOZ are mutually incompatible. Change is very slow in DMOZ, as witnessed by the pedophile sites debacle, and whilst that has been part of the success in past years - if it ain't broke don't fix it - negative trends and unmanageable maintenance overheads tend to suggest time for a rethink. But the number of editors willing to put forward and support radical change has been diminishing since the Admin system was implemented.
We have a lot of radical Editors. Count me in and quite a few I know. Most lack something to move forward like "Huevos." You would be surprised about our numbers scattered throughout. It is not a secret that what most webmasters claims are true inside DMOZ. Most editors are really LAZY. Inside forum is like the same people posting everyday (50 tops). It makes me sick that after years of having experience they still post to ask what to do. Freakin Stupidity. And the BUNCH, instead of messing around in the Resourceles Zone they need to start working their ASS. Maybe I should start to write for a Monthly Top Ten Idiots and Lazy Editors of the Week. This would be a nice wake up call and an open information project to the world. My 2' c
We could start by posting the Idiot of the Month lmocr - DMOZ traditional defender. Always talk about their horse and ranch. No idea of topics. Talk in circles.
Most of what webmasters claim is complete tripe. Sometimes there are seeds of truth. Most often a seed of truth is turned into a completely ficticious soap opera. Laziness is not the problem - it is an unpaid volunteer activity and editors give what time they want and can afford. I could no longer afford the time so I resigned. Am I lazy for not editing any more? Are DP members that don't post x number of posts here (the function of this site after all) lazy? No. Lazy is when you don't deliver on a commitment with no real excuse and since the commitment is zero and real lives are always a good excuse it simply does not apply. Are there idiots? Of course, they exist everywhere. Are there people playing politics and power games - you bet, same as in every organisation. Are there self-interested people at high levels - most likely one or two who have coated themselves in teflon somehow. Are the vast majority good honest decent people who give what time they can in their busy lives - afraid so, despite the claims often touted around that DMOZ is almost exclusively a bunch of corrupt self-servers. The fault is that DMOZ does not, has not ever, properly explained what it is and how it works in a clear and precise manner that everyone can understand. The guidelines are a mess of misinformation guaranteed to give people the wrong impression. LOL. Those willing to take on the "establishment" and debate strongly have become fewer and fewer in the last 18 months or so. And the fault is in the Admin system.