Stop defending DMOZ

So, to get listed in DMOZ, you need to impress the editor. The website should stand out in the crowd.
If we go by this formula, then hardly there should 1 or 2 sites in each category.

If we go by your theory
a) only one of google, yahoo, msn etc should be in DMOZ.
What makes yahoo search stand out in crowd compared to google?
b) Only one national news paper from each country should be in DMOZ.
c) Only one local newspaper from each city should be there.
d) What makes you think, these sites offer any unique services or even stand out in crowd? http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/E-mail/E-greetings/
e) Look at all Email providers. Almost 99% of the providers have same look/design including the wordings. Why then list all those in DMOZ?
All what you said is 'easier said than done.'.

Thanks
sri

 

yet another thread that hates dmoz.... not really good.
dmoz is a good directory maintained voluntary.

 

In some categories when there are hundreds if not thousands of more or less identical sites vying for attention and one editor who is mad enough to spend a couple of hours on it, yes you need to be somewhat special to get picked.

If you are an ironmonger in Smalltown USA and we are just starting to capture sites relating to the town for the first time, it is probably enough to be the ironmonger. If you hand carve pepper mills from driftwood you have a particularly unique product on its own account and the uniqueness of the product will do the impressing.

I'm not even going to look but if they are as unremarkable as you seem to imply it would explain why neither I nor 99.9% of my colleagues are likely to go near it to add more of the same and would rather focus on driftwood pepper mills.

Not a theory, practical reality. And your examples are all wrong. Each of the few search engines has its own unique search and results functionality, newspapers all have different editors and reporters and photographers. And in each country there are relatively few newspapers. In search engines there are still only a relative few major players. In e-greetings there are tens and tens of thousands of people who stick up an automated/semi-automated site, sit back and wait for the $$$ to roll in from the Adsense program. Frankly it is nowhere near as interesting as listing online newspapers.

 

So, depends on editor mood. OK

Ok. Great.

So, you got enough time to coment one my website which 100,0000th on your list or anybody's list, but you won't go to a directory, where your theory fails miserably. There are websites in it, with pointers to other website URLs in it. Hardly there are 3-4 websites which standout. Rest of them all provide same service i.e greetings.By same theory , even my website will not be listed. Period. But do get a courage and look at that directory/category. You will find yourself on the wrong side.

So, google search, yahoo search , msn search etc all offer unique service/content. Good.
You should have atleast said, that they use different algorithms to find the search results, to defend your point.
But for end user, it doesnot matter anyways. All what he cares is email, search etc. So listing one provider is enough. If the website is great, they will find it anyways.
Also, there are hundreded of email providers in DMOZ. Goood. Keep up the good work.

 

Thanks for all those who gave a positive rating.

I don't care, if my site is banned in DMOZ. Fortunately, google adwords is helping me get the customers i need, in an area/community/location/country i am interested in.

 

hey sridhar,
I came across hundreds of threads where a user makes a thread and starts writing negative about dmoz or any other directory like yahoo etc. But this is generally a negative approach to show users rudeness towards Dmoz.
I dont mind, if anyone here rates me negative for comments made, but this are my personal opinions.

Till day, I had tried submitting around 100+ websites to dmoz, out of same around 60% or more were listed in various categories but some are still under queue and a few rejected. I am not bothered why those got rejected on contrary competitors URL are still listed under dmoz, there might have been some problems and hence, the submitted sites rejected.

Dmoz is an unpaid project, maintained voluntary with no. of individuals worldwide (not maintained by any soul entity,person or organisation), cursing/blaming anyone for same is really not good.

Make sure, I am not associated with Dmoz neither know any single editor of dmoz.

 

You really have a big misuderstanding of DMOZ...

Where did i say anything about duplicate content????

You were the one that said:

I simply asked you why DMOZ would want to list your site if it lists so many other sites with similar content? What is the net gain to DMOZ by adding one more site in a category that already has so many similar sites?

You seem to be under the impression that DMOZ is a listing service and therefore should list your site. DMOZ is NOT a listing service and if your site does not add value to a category and has on it similar content to so many others ...what the point of listing every site possible on a topic? Only sites that add value to a category should be listed. By your own admission, your site does not meet that criteria.

 

Take the example of real estate. Every real estate firm has same functionality.
Search by price, search by property type etc.

Yet, you list these websites in respective cities, because they meet the necesities of that particular region. Here, we don't mind the interface/design/standing_out_in_crowd etc

With the same token, what iam saying is, my website too meets the needs of communities in India/Pakistan and some countries/sates in Africa.
Its content may be similar and design may not be unique. Yet it helps out few communities.
One more uniqueness, if you really care about is poser characters used in templates. This is something, very much appreciated by poser fans and used by them.

 

No it depends on the level of editor interest in the category and the level of spammy competition that has to be waded through to find anything of any value. So give me driftwood pepper mills and cancer research and Smalltown USA where my editing is productive and makes a difference.

No I won't, but the reality doesn't fail. Sites were added in the past when the subject was relatively new and unexplored - innovative and exciting. Today the concept is oversubscribed and the number of submissions tedious in the extreme so interest has waned. There are plenty of similar examples such as email services and web designers and ... So we all troop off and find more productive avenues of editing - and when everyone has a site selling driftwood pepper mills, we'll get to 30 or 40 of them and move onto something else new like waxwork sculptures of famous Argentinian soccer players. And one day we'll have enough of them and move onto something else.

Sorry about that.

They use different algorithms to find the search results.

Now much as I have enjoyed the discussion it does seem like it is going around in circles somewhat. If you were going to understand the concepts then it would have happened by now but all you seem to want to do is deliberately misunderstand the concepts. So since I have a shirt to iron and a long journey tomorrow I will take my leave and hope that if you take the time to reflect then you will begin to understand what we do, why we do it, and how we do it. Oh and an unreserved apology to Sarah is still outstanding.

 

Not in my lifetime.
Especially after the bad language used by her and OWG. And especially after, she attacked personally 'Greencard, BUSH, profiles' etc etc.

I still feel the same, her listing got a privillege more than it should be.
I stand by it and will not take it back.
You don't care about it anyways, so i don't care either.

Good luck on your journey and have safe trip.
Bye
sri

 

Fortunately 4750 other webmasters have benefitted from her freely given time and would no doubt disagree with you strongly. Unfortunately editors don't keep track of all those they help so they can't be invited to send you a personal greeting.

Shame. You were the one who kicked off the personal abuse and insults. Takes a big man/woman to admit when they are in the wrong and apologise. Never mind, that says more about you than anything else mentioned so far.

 

Why are you soliciting an apology for another editor?

Can you prove that she didnot do any wrongdoing or for that matter any other editor?
This is the category she is editing
http://dmoz.org/Regional/Oceania/New_Zealand/Auckland/

Can you prove that there are no submittals in that category waiting to be listed for months?
Can you prove that all website submittals in that category which are still waiting are newer than this listing(http://www.waitakere-bmx.com).
If yes, then i will definitely apologize her.

Can all editors come forward and make a statement that they never favored a listing over others un-duely?
If yes, then i will definitely apologize.

Again, before you set out for your long journey, cheer up and forget about this fuss. Safe driving.

 

Just read all these pages but now I'm confused? who is driving where?

 

You called her a cheat and corrupt and you won't apologize because maybe, just maybe, there are some listable sites waiting to be reviewed in an area where she and approximately 200 other editors can edit?

Earlier it was - she got personal (after you called names first) so you won't apologize.

What's it going to be next? I won't apologize because _____________ (fill in the blank).

 

I definitely made first attack based on info i have. The return attack from that editor and OWG was not related nor objective.

Whats next?

I have some guidelines and editors who have solicited an apology or an editor to whom i should apologize don't meet those guidelines.

Just honestly answer those questions i posted and you all will meet those guidelines.
And you can find my apology on this forum.

I need straight answers to my straight forward questions.

You are not required to answer. Answer, only if you feel like.

By the way, i got another user who made an invitation for 45 guests.
At this rate, i don't even need google search engine. Google adwords is enough.
Thank you.

 

My personal opinion - your guidelines are wacked.

- straight from the DMOZ guidelines (emphasis mine).

*assuming that your site was not accepted

 

My guidelines may be wacked.
I am not alleging that DMOZ guidelines are wacked.
Wacked are those editors who carefull thread and trade these guidelines to favor some listings.

I humbly accept rejection/acceptance into dmoz.

No complains.

I have tried my best to highlight the shortcomings of DMOZ system through an editors example.

You can lie to me, but not to yourself. This is what i believe in and stand by.

 

this is complete lunacy - what happened to the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty???' You fling wild accusations at Sarahk, the main 'proof' of which is that her site got listed in two months (sites get listed way faster than that, you should have recognised and admitted you were wrong about that by now)

The burden of proof is not on sarah. If you actually have a case to make, then make it, but wild accusations that started a flame war will never get threads like these anywhere.

it's a shame you picked on such a good one with nothing to hide, then.

 

Bradley,
'innocent until proven guilty" applies to democratic systems, where everything is open.
Here 'guilty until proven innocent' applies to some editors.
I have posed some questions. Answer them.
Yes, i made those allegations and still stand by those.

Answer those questions, if you can. Otherwise, there is no need for you to chip in and do the circus.
You may be an editor/volunteer. But that is on DMOJ. So do what you can with my submittal.

Here is my website http://www.ebulawa.com

 

Let's take one example of a country where "innocent until proven guilty" applies - the United States of America. A democratic system - agreed? Then why is there the phrase "need to know"? If you don't "need to know", you don't get access to certain information. Oh my goodness - everything isn't open - but it's a democratic society - oh no - the US government must be rife with cheating and corruption. Maybe it is (maybe it isn't) - but you don't have a "need to know", and they're still "innocent until proven guilty".

Same principle applies with DMOZ - you don't have a "need to know".