What the ODP Is and Isn't

The ODP (DMOZ) isn't really a search engine, but a Directory that provides data to search engines. We collect and organize data.

Our search is intended more as a search for categories within the Directory, I think. The Google Directory is a mirror of DMOZ.

Though the Directory isn't really a destination site (in my opinion), but a provider of data, it is sometimes very helpful to visit one of our categories to see similar topical or geographic sites gathered in one place as our main focus is not on providing a listing service for site owners, but building useful categories for the web surfer.

Everything we do is with the web surfer in mind and what will benefit them. Our titles and descriptions speak directly to the web surfer, rather than being written for search engine optimization. We want to tell the reader what the site is and what can be found on the site, so they can decide if it's the type of site they want to visit. The objective is to save the reader (web surfer) time in their search.

How our data gets used and delivered is a search engine function. I personally use Google in my searches, they do a very nice job of it.

This is a much different picture of the Directory than most people have from the outside because we do list sites, and we do allow the public to suggest sites to us, so it is natural for them to view us as a "Listing Service" for them, to expect a timely listing, and if their site isn't listed, to assume there is something wrong with it that can be "fixed" (if only the editor would give them feedback).

That is totally false.

To confuse matters even more, the Google Directory is a mirror of the ODP Directory, only it doesn't take any submissions, one has to submit to the ODP Directory to show up in the Google Directory (which in turn is associated with Google search).

Google is one entity.
The ODP (DMOZ) is a seperate entity.

They are two seperate entities with two seperate goals.

Google is a search engine that finds and delivers information to the searcher.
The ODP lists and organizes data for others to use freely in the form of categories.

If you have two different entities, with two different goals, you're going to have two sets of requirements.

For a search engine, it's key words in the title/description for search engine optimization.

For the ODP, who speaks directly to the web surfer, the title/description is intended to be a common sense explanation of what the site is and what the site contains. A list of key words are a hindrance to that and aren't considered.

The goal of the ODP is focused on one type of person, the web surfer. Editors build categories of useful sites with only that person in mind. We don't want every site because we don't need every site to meet that goal.

You might say, "My site is great, there's nothing wrong with it!" and you might be right, but, it's just not a site the Directory needs in that particular category to provide a useful resource for that web surfer that we serve, and that's what it comes down to.

You might say, " I have a right to be listed, my competitors are!" No, you have no rights at all, because we don't serve you, but web surfers, and we expressly state that not all sites will be accepted. Our goal isn't to list all sites, but just sites we feel (in our opinion) will make the category a useful resource.

"What about webmasters and site owners, we create what you list. Without us you would have nothing to list ?"

That's true, but as our goal is to serve web surfers by listing the sites that they might find most useful, rather than having to wade through a lot of the repititious sites, why do we owe you anything? We don't. We're merely sorting through what you've created for the best (in our opinion), that meets our goal.

The fact that you exist doesn't give you any rights.

Being selective doesn't mean we're pompous or arrogant, it means we're selective.

When we're building these categories, there is absolutely no hurry in doing so, one site every few days is fine, or a hundred sites a day is fine. Whether we get the sites from the suggestion box or we find them on our own, is also fine, it's not a race but a process of building.

Those of you who think we're a listing service will never be happy because we aren't, never have been, and never will be. Those of you you who would like to join our efforts are most welcome to, .

 

How many do you review? Daily, weekly or monthly? How many does the average editor review? More or less? I haven't had luck in a very long time (six years). Would your review my site? 42 total listings in my niche over six years. I tried everything from regional, asking to become and editor, to just the niche and no luck. Site is relevant especially with our blog. It think my niche is run by a competitor who won't ever list me. Any help would be great.

 

Why?

If feedback was given, then the issue could be resolved. If that is false, then there must be something other then the content of the site that is keeping it out. Payment maybe? Competing site possibly? A site that is close to being accepted that is rejected by a technicality is fine to keep out, but by not pointing out that tiny little issue is certainly doing NOTHING for the end user.

Why are editors given a second chance with a reason when sites are not? I'd think it should be the other way around... if it's perfection you are wanting, then help get the sites listable and pass over those trying to be editors that can't figure things out.

The end user is the same for both the ODP and most Search Engines. Having a choice in most cases is better then not having a choice, and in the case of the ODP, by being as seemingly selective as they are, they are not being as helpful. Someplace in the middle would be ideal, as where the SE has too many, in many cases the ODP does not have enough.

That's right Crowbar, tell it like it is... the end user, the webmaster, and anyone outside of the ODP does not have any rights! Anyone outside of the ODP does not matter... the only thing that matters is the inner circle!

It does not mean you are not pompous or arrogant either

Which is why many editors feel that edit count is important and that it should be something to be brought up time and again...

Could not have said it better myself

 

That whole picture is false, not just the last sentence, so there is no issue for us, that is not what the Directory's goal is. We are not a listing service, so feedback is not necessary. And neither is becoming an advisor to website owners/builders. It's either a site that (in our opinion) will make the category useful to a web surfer or it isn't, what is there to discuss?

You build them, we sort them and use the ones we need.

Because you're talking about two entirely different things. A site that we don't need, and a new editor who makes a mistake due to being new. Why do you take things out of context?

The end user for both is the web surfer. They are separate entities with different goals, so no choice is necessary. The ODP lists and organizes data, the search engine rates sites and delivers information. Much of their information is downloaded from the Directory, what they do with it then is their business, not ours. What they do has nothing to do with what we do in building the Directory.

The end user we serve is the web surfer, and by proxy, perhaps other directories and search engines who deliver the information to the web surfer by downloading our data. Webmasters are not part of categorizing sites, nor delivering sites, so they're not a factor.

Edit count has to be taken with a grain of salt. It can be a good indication of the amount of editing experience an editor has and how much they know about editing, but some areas of the Directory, like Regional, have more opportunities for a high edit count because we create a lot of new subcategories and all the links that go with them. There's much less opportunity in Topical areas of the Directory.

I personally think editing in a wide variety of categories, acros wide areas of the Directory is more important than edit count.

 

Well, I agree with the majority of your points. The one disagreement I do have is claiming that the ODP is for the 'web user', when in reality we all know the only real people that visit the ODP are webmasters submitting their sites, webmasters looking to see if they've been approved, or directory owners checking out ODP's scope and quality of listings. It's a fact of life, home users never will use the ODP to find businesses or websites, for that matter.

In my experience, I haven't had a single site to review from a manual submission. The only new sites or edits I have done have been sites outsourced by myself or by other editors and sent to the category which I edit. That's the way the ODP should be, but sites blatantly not following the guidelines are forever continually submitting to the directory, which wastes useful resources, including editorial time.

Webmasters are stabbing themselves in the back by submitting several sites when in reality the majority of their submissions clearly aren't good enough and, IMO, are just there to clutter up the web.

 

It varies from editor to editor because we do this in our free time. Guys like me who work 6 days a week might have less time to devote than say somebody who is retired, though retirees get pretty busy too.

An editor is required to do one edit in a 4 month period, or they time out. They can ask for reinstatement at any time, I have 4 times myself, for various reasons.

Some editors might edit a hundred sites a day, others only a few sites occasionally, and that's perfectly fine when the goal is to build categories, not become a listing service.

An editor once described it like building a butterfly collection, some are valuable to the collection, and some aren't, and you do it as a hobby in your spare time. There's no rush, it's not your job, but a pastime you indulge in. And that really describes editing to a T.

You may not like that idea, but that's the way it really is, and the size of the Directory shows that it must be a fairly efficient method, we being the largest in the world, .

 

I'm not trying to take them out of context, but rather, I am trying to put them into the proper context.

Compare the submit and add pages with the rest of the guidelines. Many sites that fit one will not fit the other. The editor is supposed to understand the ins and outs of both, but the submitter is only required to know the basics... if the basics are not good enough for a listing, then it's no wonder that so many sites are not listed.

As it stands, someone can try & try again to become an editor, and they are given the common courtesy of a second, third, and thirtieth chance. The submitter is barely given a single chance. They are told to submit and GO AWAY!

Telling the submitter to bugger off after they have submitted is not user friendly, and it does not serve the end user what-so-ever, in any way shape or form. If the ODP was truly there for the end user, they would help the middle man a bit more then not even bothering with the submitting process.

 

If (do you?) owned your own directory, and the same person was continually submitting their site which didn't make the quality grade required - what would you do? You'd either ban the site, or ban the IP address, or both.

At least ODP allow anyone and everyone to submit at least once. Whether or not this is a good thing is beyond speculation

 

The ODP isn't necessarily a destination site, most people just use a search engine, I do, but, if you wanted to see a collection of sites gathered together in one spot about a Topic, like Water Gardening, a category like that would be a good place to browse, and it leads off to related categories on the topic which is very handy.

Or if you went to your city (locality) in Regional you could find all the entities in your local area that have websites.

Most people, like you say, just don't know about the Directory. I think there are plans to change that.

 

I'm guessing someone is going to have problems

 

i have one question.

why does the odp website layout look so..primitive?

 

lol, well, I don't think we tell them that, but, if they've submitted a site suggestion to the suggestion box, nothing more is needed, nothing more is wanted, and there's nothing more for them to do. We're not a listing service, why do you keep insisting we are?

All of our guidelines are open to the public.
http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/

 

To me it looks nice and clean, no ads cluttering up the page, , but I think a lot of editors agree with you. Very functional, but you guys are the experts in web design, not me.

 

Post removed, so no need for me to comment on it.

 

I'm not insisting that you are. Far from it... I'm just saying that if submitted sites are an issue, why have the submission queue? Why are second chances not given to sites? I figured if you liked your hobby of listing sites you want to list more & more... not ignore them.

So? They are NOT required reading for the submitter are they? Reading that much to get a single listing ANY PLACE is not worth it... what I'm saying is that those are in far more detail then the submit or add pages. Following just those two pages, ya know, the two pages that submitters are supposed to read, is not enough to get a listing.

And yes, those are public... and as such, why are second chances given to editors trying to get in? They have the manual to read, if they do not make the grade, allowing them to try again only shows that the quality of the listable sites is more important then those listing them. And with that being the case, it's no wonder there are thousands upon thousands of geocities pages

Well, that's not done with editor applications... and I'm not talking about the sites that are pure crap with no chance of ever getting a listing, I'm talking about the average site that is close to getting a listing.

It's almost like DMOZ wants substandard editors to fill the place up with quality sites... it's no wonder that such a thing is not happening, they are holding the sites to a higher standard then the editors.

 

Actually, all we need is a url, but it does help speed things up if it is submitted to the correct category and with an ODP compliant description. That has nothing to do with whether a site is accepted or not, but it does grease the skids a bit, I think.

 

When you get higher permissions, like at State level, you'll find that many sites have been submitted there, instead of to the locality they belong in, . There are a lot of sites that haven't been moved down yet, at least 50-60% of those site suggestions at the state level are misplaced. A state editor spends a lot of time doing just that.

Right now, you can't see what's above you. The same is true in the large cities. Where are you editing? I'll try to find some for you. A good trick for finding locality sites is to punch in your zip code and do a search on that, or the first 6 numbers of a phone number. It amazed me what was in my locality, that I never knew existed, .

 

That is incorrect. If that was all you needed then you would be a listing service. For a site to get listed one has to either know an editor in which case the site does not really need to comply, or the person needs to read more then just the submit page.

However, I have told others that reading the guidelines will help get a listing, and I was told such a thing was shaky advice.... so in a way, even reading the add and submit page is not good enough, and following the guidelines themselves would not be enough to get a listing, so I guess you are right... all that is needed is the URL, the rest is a crap shoot.

 

All we need is a url, as far as finding a site is concerned. Whether it gets listed is another matter.

Some of the best sites I've found, I've found by following links on a website. They were never submitted to the Directory.

I think what you're saying is how does a site actually get itself listed. It can't. There's not one single thing it can do to get itself listed.

It can get itself noticed by an editor by having an ODP compliant title & description, and it can reduce the waiting time by submitting to the correct category, but there is no magic bullet that will get it listed.

What many of you seem to want is a personal review of your site by an editor, and specific advice on what to put on your website that will qualify it for a listing. That is not our job.

First, that's usually not the problem, as much as too many site suggestions and not enough editors to review them is.

Secondly, what's valuable for one category might be different for another category, it varies.

My advice would be:

Compare what's on your site, to what's on the other sites in that category, and provide something really unique and of value to a web surfer, and make it prominantly seen. Don't shout it, just put it where an editor will see it.

Read the category "Description" up in the right hand corner of the page, most have one. It should give you a better idea of what it's for, and perhaps some submitting advice. Like this for a State level RE category:
http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/North_...pi/Business_and_Economy/Real_Estate/desc.html

Follow the instructions, they are very clear. When you don't, it irritates us, and wastes our time. If you don't care, why should we? Personally, I feel this way. When I see a compliant description, I know the person has tried, and I appreciate that. When I see a non compliant description, I get a little disgusted and I may just move on to another site. My time is valuable to me, even if it isn't to you.

Submit once, and be patient, there are 100,000+ other people doing the same thing. Each of them have the best site on the Internet, just as you do, .

 

Why are there guidelines? If following them is shaky, or wont get the site listed, why are the guidelines even there?

The ODP is a listing service for the editors, as the guidelines are nothing more then a smokescreen to get their own sites listed... or am I wrong, and if I am wrong, then how am I wrong?