DMOZ is NOT owned by Google! Why are you making such false claims? DMOZ is owned by Netscape, who is owned by AOL.
And that is so bad. How can the poor senior editors sell listings and make money if the number of editors increased and they can participate in all areas. Let's continue with keeping ODP a private club (business) of few senior editors.
Well, let's look at the facts: 1. Everyone is welcome to apply to become an editor. 2. New editors are accepted every day. 3. There are not "a few", but many hundreds of "senior editors", all of whose edits are visible to all other editors. 4. Unsupported allegations lose their punch after endless repetition, and become nothing more than discredited ravings.
1) But not everyone is accepted. 2) They can do nothing excpet to improve the number of editors stats. 3) 100 is still few in a overall picture and as Orwell said in animal farm: "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than other ones." 4) Unsupported a*s kissing lose their punch after endless repetition, and become nothing more than discredited ravings.
Can any one can explain about Dmoz and i want to know full information please any one can explain me.
i go over to dmoz once in a while. i have had a listing there from 8-10 years ago it seems, and one i greatly appreciated at the time as dmoz was special and big and volunteer and i was new. the reason i was over there recently was out of curiosity, to check on the approx number of editors under "mexico" and what i found was pretty surprising, just 2 editors in about 30-40 catergories that i checked. almost every category was open and begging for an editor. i thought, i don't know where those 83,254 editors are right now but they ain't south of the border! i'd do the pacific coast area 1/4 of the whole country myself if i was invited or motivated or had an extra 6-10 months on my hands or both. lazy me. (one really needs to get paid for job like that after some point which is perhaps why it hasn't faired so well over these long years, and the newer vibrant wikipedia has - that's an interesting comparison right there for another thread) i like the idea of a volunteer directory whatever...sorry to ramble.
Besides the listed editors that you were looking for, there are also 200-300 (free floating) types of editors who have access to everything in the Directory, editall and meta editors. Most editors will be found at the locality (city) levels. The editors at say, state or country level are fewer because it requires more knowledge and experience over wider areas to be granted those editing permissions. Editing permissions are like a pyramid, the higher you are on the pyramid, the more categories you can edit in below that point. Most editors will be found at the bottom of the pyramid and have very limited editing permissions, perhaps 1-4 small categories. A lot of editors have no desire (or time) to edit in wider areas of the Directory, and that's perfectly fine as we're all volunteers, and they are every bit as important and equal as any other editor. We are all on the same team. Those of us with more editing experience may have many thousands of categories to edit in. These higher permissions are only granted if the editor applies for them, and shows that he/she has enough editing experience and knowledge to be trusted with them. The permissions can be taken away if an editor doesn't live up to expectations. Where an editor is listed can be quite deceiving. I edit at the country level, which means I edit every site within the United States in the Regional area of the Directory (which puts me at the top of that pyramid), but, I also edit in four small categories in other parts of the Directory, which puts me at the bottom of the pyramid in those areas, .
Er, I presume you know that Wikipedia is a completely different concept (for a start, it's not a directory), with the only similarity being they both rely on volunteers? In any case, you will find many existing threads comparing and contrasting the two different organisations.
You can view us as volunteers as well, and we can also spend our time how we see fit. Sometimes we will post on RZ about a dead site. Sometimes we will report or update the listings ourselves, other times we will rant about them on forums such as this one. However, the obligation, IS upon the actual editors. To say otherwise kind of takes away the need for editors... if you feel no obligation to the directory, why volunteer any time at all? The fact it falls down to "if any of us feel like hunting out the sites you mention" is rather sad, as that says a lot about how much care is given by such volunteers...I recall a day when editors would jump on any report of a dead site as soon as they saw it because they WANTED to make sure that the ODP was the best. Now I see that maybe they will if they feel like it. As for why DMOZ is popular. It USED to be the biggest and the best. Now it's just the biggest... the popularity pretty much falls down to the undying hype given by SEO bloggers trying to get content on their own pages (most of which are not listed in DMOZ). Maybe they keep pushing it in hopes that thier backs will be scratched by scratching the back of the ODP *shrug* The obligation SHOULD be to the end user, and the best way to fufill that obligation is to make sure that the ODP is the very best it can be. Or at least that is how I see it...