Is DMOZ still that important?

[maepaulino]

I'm not sure if it's already been stated here, dmoz.org is accepting submissions once again! And, we all know the recent "thing" with DMOZ, do you think it is still as important even after the crash?

[vistadivine.com]

well Dmoz is still important to the people who are already listed there as they are getting a high quality link but I think its crap to the people who have not been listed since years.

[Forsh]

Why wouldn't new submitters be getting the same high-quality link?

[dvduval]

There are something like 1,000,000+ pending links and the site is still being restored. I don't know how they will ever catch up.

[Forsh]

......that sucks.

[khasmoth]

Originally Posted by dvduval

There are something like 1,000,000+ pending links and the site is still being restored. I don't know how they will ever catch up.

I just wish they could restore it because 10,000 of that 1 million+ pending links is mine. Just kidding.

[webzenstar]

In my personal view, DMOZ was the first conceptual attempt at a somewhat democratic link building with a kind of "wiki-like" approach.

Because of...

• Poor customer service;
• Biased review process;
• Corrupt editors;
• Careless admins;
• Submission backlog.

...the whole project hasn't grown up gracefully, like it was initially intended to.

For now, it's a bloated, outdated and largely biased link repository that I fail to find relevant, 95% of the time.

Nevertheless, I give an A+ for the founding principles behind DMOZ.

[Jane_sexy19]

Now i know, DMOZ Sucks!!!!

[Surnova]

I'd still spend a few minutes submitting my sites to DMOZ now, even if they never get accepted because of the buildup.

[georgechristodoulou]

DMOZ has a big back log. If you want a faster inclusion, it may not be suitable for you.

[Johan007]

You can’t make a blanket statement about DMOZ because each category is very different with its own back log and editors.

[casperl]

In my personal view, DMOZ was the first conceptual attempt at a somewhat democratic link building with a kind of "wiki-like" approach.

Because of...

* Poor customer service;
* Biased review process;
* Corrupt editors;
* Careless admins;
* Submission backlog.


...the whole project hasn't grown up gracefully, like it was initially intended to.

For now, it's a bloated, outdated and largely biased link repository that I fail to find relevant, 95% of the time.

Nevertheless, I give an A+ for the founding principles behind DMOZ.

I totally agree!

[Forsh]

Well I submitted to them. Will they contact me if/when it is ever listed?

[PaulX]

Originally Posted by Forsh

Well I submitted to them. Will they contact me if/when it is ever listed?

No, you won't be contacted.
Not when it it listed. Not when it is rejected.

Originally Posted by webzenstar

In my personal view, DMOZ was the first conceptual attempt at a somewhat democratic link building with a kind of "wiki-like" approach.

Because of...

> Poor customer service;
As webmasters or other people suggesting website are not our customers we don't give them any service at all. Not poor and not good. None at all.

> Biased review process;
Yes, we only list websites that fit within our guidelines. The rest will be rejected.

> Corrupt editors;
We know that there have been some corrupt editors in the past. We are sure there will be some corrupt editors in the future. And there might even be a few corrupt editors at this moment. We will do everything to find these people and correct their actions. And we hope that people outside DMOZ will report them if they notice any.

> Careless admins;
All editors (atleast the ones I know) care a lot about DMOZ. And that incudes the admins.

> Submission backlog.
For DMOZ there is no backlog at all. There is just a big pool of suggested (not submitted) websites which we can use (not must use) to find sites to include in the directory. Eventualy we will look at all suggested websites. We just don't know when that will be done, at to be honest we don't care when a suggested site will be reviewed. We only care about the directory as a whole. Is it usefull for our customers (the websites using our data and the people using DMOZ or any of the data copies to find information). In our opinion it still is usefull for them.

[WillB]

I still submit my sites to DMOZ. I do wish they were a bit more vocal
about the status of my link submission though. This attitude of "you
can submit if you like, we don't really care" puts me off.

[PaulX]

Originally Posted by WillB

This attitude of "you can submit if you like, we don't really care" puts me off.

If you suggest a good website to DMOZ we are happy about it. We managed to find another usefull site. We might have found it using other sources but you helped us finding it easier. Thanks for helping us.
If you suggest a website we don't want to list (from my experience about 80 to 90 % of suggestions fall in this group) we are very unhappy.
Based on our experience we know that the majority of suggested sites is not listable. That is why we don't care much about the pool of suggested sites anymore. But this depends on the type of category. For many categories the pool of suggestions is still very usefull. For other categories it is 99.99% crap and most editors don't look at suggestions in those categories at all. Why waste our time looking at 1000 sites to find one listable one if we have many other sources to find usefull and listable sites.

[rankland]

Originally Posted by maepaulino

I'm not sure if it's already been stated here, dmoz.org is accepting submissions once again! And, we all know the recent "thing" with DMOZ, do you think it is still as important even after the crash?

Is the pope still a virgine?.....Thats the same question you just asked.

[Forsh]

Originally Posted by PaulX

If you suggest a good website to DMOZ we are happy about it. We managed to find another usefull site. We might have found it using other sources but you helped us finding it easier. Thanks for helping us.
If you suggest a website we don't want to list (from my experience about 80 to 90 % of suggestions fall in this group) we are very unhappy.
Based on our experience we know that the majority of suggested sites is not listable. That is why we don't care much about the pool of suggested sites anymore. But this depends on the type of category. For many categories the pool of suggestions is still very usefull. For other categories it is 99.99% crap and most editors don't look at suggestions in those categories at all. Why waste our time looking at 1000 sites to find one listable one if we have many other sources to find usefull and listable sites.

So 99.9% of the sites suggested to you just aren't good enough? Golly, I sure hope you aren't the official spokesperson.

[rankland]

Originally Posted by PaulX

No, you won't be contacted.
Not when it it listed. Not when it is rejected.


> Poor customer service;
As webmasters or other people suggesting website are not our customers we don't give them any service at all. Not poor and not good. None at all.

> Biased review process;
Yes, we only list websites that fit within our guidelines. The rest will be rejected.

> Corrupt editors;
We know that there have been some corrupt editors in the past. We are sure there will be some corrupt editors in the future. And there might even be a few corrupt editors at this moment. We will do everything to find these people and correct their actions. And we hope that people outside DMOZ will report them if they notice any.

> Careless admins;
All editors (atleast the ones I know) care a lot about DMOZ. And that incudes the admins.

> Submission backlog.
For DMOZ there is no backlog at all. There is just a big pool of suggested (not submitted) websites which we can use (not must use) to find sites to include in the directory. Eventualy we will look at all suggested websites. We just don't know when that will be done, at to be honest we don't care when a suggested site will be reviewed. We only care about the directory as a whole. Is it usefull for our customers (the websites using our data and the people using DMOZ or any of the data copies to find information). In our opinion it still is usefull for them.

\


who cares i think donald trump is corruped to, but if he called me in to work tomorrow you dont think id be on the first bus.
If google does except you in his directory, getting quality links are on auto, your put in every country... nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooo i think googles mean i dont want to be in it . Ask v7n or any big directory if given a chance to be in DMOZ. if they would turn it down. I cant even believe we are having this conversation.

[PaulX]

Originally Posted by Forsh

So 99.9% of the sites suggested to you just aren't good enough? Golly, I sure hope you aren't the official spokesperson.

No I said in certain categories is 99.99% crap.
In other categories almost 100% of suggested sites will be acceoted.
But, from my experience, overall 80 to 90% of suggestions will be rejected, reasons: already listed, mirror, related to an already listed site, deeplink, duplicate submission, no original content, not enough content.