Why DMOZ is more important than ever

[dave conz]

My final thoughts:
- DMOZ is a very large operation with the usual mix of dedicated people, half-dedicated people, and self-centred idiots. To expect anything else from any organisation would be unrealistic.
- I believe DMOZ has had too much weight in the past with Google. I don't think any single directory should be that important. But whatever I think, the fact is that DMOZ is still important enough to be worth taking seriously.
- DMOZ provides a service which appears to have a reasonable bell-curve of customer satisfaction. Naturally the people on the "dissatisfied" side of the curve will complain more than people on the "satisfied" side - that's human nature. I have worked in mass media for long enough to accept this situation without getting upset.
- It is also human nature to take a negative experience and extrapolate this to describe other people and areas beyond the person's direct experience. I hear a lot about the failings of "the editors" from people who have probably not dealt with enough editors to make a statistically valid comment.
- My personal experience with the editors and meta editors working in my little corner of DMOZ has been that they are hard-working, dedicated people who genuinely want the system to work for everyone. In fact my biggest criticism is that they spend too much time catering to every single submission whereas they should reject the ones which are botched up (this is where I agree with Cray).
- There are two types of people in life: Those who get things done and those who complain about it.

Bottom line: Submit your site(s) to DMOZ. If it works for you, great. If it doesn't work for you, don't cry - you're still alive and there are plenty of other options.

[thebassman]

I just applied to be an editor... hehe...

[cray]

If it doesn't work for you, don't cry

LOL

[PaulHarris]

once again they have visited my site - thats 4 times this month - still not in. I think the editor likes my wallpapers but just dont wanna list it heh

[MadHatter]

I have just applied to list my site, (sig), Christian Forum.... There was only about 20 other sites in the category, lets see if it gets listed then! (I was very specific with category: http://dmoz.org/Kids_and_Teens/Compu...ums/Christian/ )

[John Scott]

Dave,

Some organizations have policies which make them virtually useless. Some organizations fail to have policies that make them useful. DMOZ appears to have both policies that make them useless, and they also fail to have policies that make them useful.

Having been an editor at DMOZ, I know quite a bit about the subject. And I read over at Resource Zone quite a bit, too. One policy that would be make DMOZ useful would be a self-imposed deadline to review submissions. I think it's odd that, in the one hand they ask for volunteers; and in the other they reject most volunteer applications out of hand. Dozens of forum members have been rejected, even though I know these forum members to be educated, intelligent people.

Also, they ask for submissions, but then it's often the case that they don't review those submissions for a year or more. If I ask somebody to submit to BlueFind, I would consider it good manners to at least review the submissions in a timely manner.

And, it's exactly a system that reeks of open, democratic ideal. The way they terminate editors is less than honorable. The way they make policy is authoritarian.

Did you know that V7Inc.com and internet-marketing-research.net are consisdered "duplicate sites"? Yep, they actually accused me of creating them on two different domains just in order to get more listings in DMOZ. To a normal, intelligent human being, however, the idea of having V7inc hosted alongside IMR is just rediculous. The sites have two entirely disparate purposes.

It just lacks common sense.

[cray]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Also, they ask for submissions, but then it's often the case that they don't review those submissions for a year or more. If I ask somebody to submit to BlueFind, I would consider it good manners to at least review the submissions in a timely manner.

Exactly.

[MadHatter]

Did you know that V7Inc.com and internet-marketing-research.net are consisdered "duplicate sites"? Yep, they actually accused me of creating them on two different domains just in order to get more listings in DMOZ. To a normal, intelligent human being, however, the idea of having V7inc hosted alongside IMR is just rediculous. The sites have two entirely disparate purposes.

I can see how they would get an internet marketing/seo site confused with your duplicate hosting company
That is just ridiculous!

[andysands]

One policy that would be make DMOZ useful would be a self-imposed deadline to review submissions.

An interesting idea.

However, the only way we could have a deadline like would be if we got huge amounts of competent new editors in the areas that are often backlogged.

The hard part of that is that the backlogged areas tend to be the areas that are less likely to be of interest to editors (who are after all giving up their time for free.) [Being honest would you rather review sites about a hobby that is of interest to you or that relate to where you live now/where you were born, or would you secretly enjoy processing 8 gazillion businesses that all do the same thing?]

It also overlooks the fact that many of the backlogged areas already have a large number of sites listed on the topic -so adding them gives less value to the directory (at least in terms of adds per hour of editor time) than say, building a new category that the directory doesn't have anywhere else.

Also I think a lot of submitters really don't understand how bad the majority of submissions are.

I processed 30ish unreviewed tonight in one queue, 3 of them (so 10%) were actually relevant to the cat and got listed.

I probably moved 30% to another category where they fit better.

The rest were a mixture of spam, affiliate farms, dead links and mirrors of content already listed. I ended up spending over an hour digging into one nest of spammer junk trying to figure out what on earth was going on.

If submitters submitted one honest url for their site, to the proper category, with a title that reflected the name of their business or site, and a description which briefly what the site provided without hype. Then our growth rate would be so much faster.

For instance tonight I'd have added 30 sites rather than 3.

I still have hope that the more people get online the more editors we will get. If we signed up a million editors (not a big proportion of the World really) - the UK alone probably has 10million internet users. Then unreviewed queues would indeed last minutes.

In order for this to happen though, more SEOs and webmasters have to be positive in their approach to us - if you guys support dmoz - more people will sign up.

If I could wish for two things that would vastly increase editor productivity in terms of processing unreviewed:

1) Submit to the right category.
2) Submit the one authoritative url for the site.

I can tidy up titles and descriptions to comply with the guidelines in much less time than it takes to find the proper category for a mis-submitted site and certainly in less time than it takes to research spammer trickery.

Of course even if most submitters did this we would still be at the mercy of webmasters whose sites (e.g affiliate link farms) are not listable per the guidelines, but will try just about any sneaky tactic to get themselves listed.

Cheers,

Andy

--
ODP Editor: andysands

[cgo]

it seems like someone who works for dmoz would attempt to sell entrance.

[younghistorians]

I'm an editor of 2 categories....watch what you say :wink:

[thebassman]

My site just got in! Yay... they kinda wrecked my description, though... still haven't heard back if I've been accepted as an editor, though... hehe.

[awall19]

Originally Posted by andysands

However, the only way we could have a deadline like would be if we got huge amounts of competent new editors in the areas that are often backlogged.

The catch is that competent is not always so and there seems to be a randomness about some selections. I have been turned down about a half dozen times. Of course never told why or how to become more competent.

I am good enough to be on a talk radio show or quoted by internet news. I am good enough to be a moderator of this forum. Good enough to work on dozens of sites. Good enough to be referenced by the largest search engine resource site in the world more than once. Good enough to edit for just about every directory except DMOZ.

I will admit that on occasion I will make a spelling error or gramerical error. English is not my best subject. A few of the times I spent over a half hour submitting to categories that interested me just to be rejected without reason. I tried my best to make sure the words were spelled correctly and the titles and descriptions were proper.

It did not matter. And as far as I am concerned the word competent is a bogus cover of some sort. You guys would rather moan about a backlog of entries than to take a chance on a person learning some as they go.

When I edited for GoGuides I forgot to put a few of the backslashes in one of my categories. I was told by an editor. I went back and added them. Is the ODP pay per click category better than the one maintained by my personal lack of competency?

NOPE.

MIRROR SITES
That is not really my opinion. I know how to search through pay per click search results to find engines which are just backfeeding from another provider. I bet if I went through those DMOZ entries I would find more than one site doing that.

DUPLICATE ENTRIES
Why does advertsise globally list in this category (as the first listing) by its name
http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/W...earch_Engines/
and lists one category below it on a directories page (as the first listing) as
"Free Advertising For Small and Medium Sized Websites."
http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/W...s/Directories/
which is a rather pathetic site title

Most of the ideals held by a few of the top editors are also ignored by many others. The system should be changed from idealistic to something that is more realistic.

I actually think Bruce Stone has a better system than the ODP and if he had .1% of their work force his directory would be larger. The ODP wastes way too much time catering to junk submissions. Delete, delete, delete, delete...that is how junk submissions should go.

Do not punish competent people for the actions of incompetent people.

On the issue of relevency the ODP is way too large to stop duplicate submission of similar sites. You do not get over a million sites listed without listing a few duplicates.

It does not hurt the directory users experience if a site is listed in a couple categories as much as it hurts them if the site they should have seen is not there because it has been waiting close to a year (or far longer).

[John Scott]

Hi and welcome to IMR, Andy.

Originally Posted by andysands

An interesting idea.

However, the only way we could have a deadline like would be if we got huge amounts of competent new editors in the areas that are often backlogged.

I think you will find that there are thousands of potentially competent editors here on the Internet. I often wonder about all the rejected editors - what tiny mistakes they made to be rejected. I heard one meta editor complaining about the editor applications containing misspelt words, at another webmaster forum. I took a look at his once categories, and every occurence of "the Internet" was lacking the capital "I". Moral of the story - nobody's perfect, but even imperfect editors can get you closer to the goal.

Originally Posted by andysands

The hard part of that is that the backlogged areas tend to be the areas that are less likely to be of interest to editors (who are after all giving up their time for free.) [Being honest would you rather review sites about a hobby that is of interest to you or that relate to where you live now/where you were born, or would you secretly enjoy processing 8 gazillion businesses that all do the same thing?]

I pay my editors. I have two people adding sites and adding categories full time. If you want some of those boring topics to get addressed, maybe one of the staff editors should get involved in actual editing. Last I heard, you were down to one staff editor - is she still there?

Originally Posted by andysands

Also I think a lot of submitters really don't understand how bad the majority of submissions are.

I understand. I used to edit at DMOZ, and I review BlueFind submissions on occasion. Most aren't in the right category, and most don't have usable descriptions.

Originally Posted by andysands

I processed 30ish unreviewed tonight in one queue, 3 of them (so 10%) were actually relevant to the cat and got listed.

Sounds about right.

Originally Posted by andysands

In order for this to happen though, more SEOs and webmasters have to be positive in their approach to us - if you guys support dmoz - more people will sign up.

That's odd. From the way DMOZ treats people, I would have thought that the last thing they want is more people signing up.

Originally Posted by andysands

Of course even if most submitters did this we would still be at the mercy of webmasters whose sites (e.g affiliate link farms) are not listable per the guidelines, but will try just about any sneaky tactic to get themselves listed.

Not all rejected sites are affiliate link farms. Not all are duplicate sites. Case in point: www.internet-marketing-research.net and www.v7inc.com – No intelligent person would suggest that these sites are duplicate, yet that’s exactly what DMOZ said. DMOZ meta editors suggested that I was using two different domains simply in order to get myself additional DMOZ listings (as if DMOZ listings were worth 1/100th the effort.)

[PhilC]

I agree with a lot that has been said here. DMOZ has a lot of scope for improvement. I just want to add 2 things that I think people are ignorant or unaware about :

--> ODP is a professional organisation and NOT some haphazardly organised movement. It is a non profit venture of a profit oriented company - Netscape.

So even if you are working for free, even if you aren't a direct employee, you are expected to behave as any other professional employee of Netscape. And that means you don't have the right to shoot of your mouth to your seniors, play the fool or do as you wish. That also means your superior has the right to fire you, just as his superior can fire him.

That also means you HAVE to follow company policies.
If you don't like any policy try to get it changed through the usual organizational channels. Always choose the professional approach.

If you can't, make another choice. Whatever the choice, remember that a disgruntled employee is not preffered by any professional setup.

(awall19 this should also answer your question. As any professional setup, they have the right to decide whom they want to accept. Perhaps with their bad experience with webmasters and SEO's, it might be an internal policy to think many times before accepting another into the service. I would advise you to not give up.)

--> Listing in ODP isn't for the benefit of webmasters or website owners.

Personally, thanks. All this for and against outcry about DMOZ affirmed my belief more strongly on how DMOZ is the most important directory, currently. I look forward to seeing DMOZ improve and getting better and better ...

[PaulHarris]

congrats bassman - people bloddy gettin in b4 me ... mumble mumble mumble lol

[andysands]

I can't really comment on the application vetting process, as I am not a meta. However I do feel that there is a need to be strict on grammar in applications.

Its not so important that people have naturally perfect spelling, as the editing interface provides spellchecking functionality, but if people are not even going to bother grammar checking their submission, I think its reasonable to expect that they won't bother grammar checking their edits later either.
--

That is not really my opinion. I know how to search through pay per click search results to find engines which are just backfeeding from another provider. I bet if I went through those DMOZ entries I would find more than one site doing that.

Mirrors - yes you would, there are always sites that have sneaked past the guidelines and when we discover them they get cleaned up.

--

DUPLICATE ENTRIES
Why does advertsise globally list in this category (as the first listing) by its name. <snipped rest>

Thanks for pointing that one out, I'll look into it.

I heard one meta editor complaining about the editor applications containing misspelt words, at another webmaster forum. I took a look at his once categories, and every occurence of "the Internet" was lacking the capital "I". Moral of the story - nobody's perfect, but even imperfect editors can get you closer to the goal.

Yes well, he/she clearly hadn't trolled enough messageboards in the past to know that it is never a good idea to criticise other peoples' grammar unless you are perfect yourself. :-)

Of course it's possible that the descs for the listings in that category weren't written by that editor, since any number of people might have edited there.

I pay my editors. I have two people adding sites and adding categories full time. If you want some of those boring topics to get addressed, maybe one of the staff editors should get involved in actual editing. Last I heard, you were down to one staff editor - is she still there?

Dmoz can't really pay editors to add sites - staff editors are funded by AOL, effectively their time is donated free to project. (There are two active a.t.m.)

The only way to finance more staff editors would be to introduce paid submissions, but that wouldn't be in the spirit of the project. How are the editors who are giving up their time for free going to feel if they are reviewing submissions that make AOL money.

Also you mention the idea of a staff editor reviewing submissions. From a dmoz perspective - one of the most important things is directory growth - adding new categories on topics or localities that we don't already have. Reviewing submissions is not now necessarily the fastest way to do this, because of the levels of spam that have to be dealt with - and because of the amount of submissions to the wrong cat.

Editor time may be better used building the new cats from scratch using search engines to find sites. I do this quite a lot - mainly for localities, but I also built an application firewalls cat because that technology wasn't covered in the directory.

Not all rejected sites are affiliate link farms. Not all are duplicate sites. Case in point: www.internet-marketing-research.net and www.v7inc.com – No intelligent person would suggest that these sites are duplicate, yet that’s exactly what DMOZ said. DMOZ meta editors suggested that I was using two different domains simply in order to get myself additional DMOZ listings (as if DMOZ listings were worth 1/100th the effort.)

I don't know the history here John, and I don't know enough about SEO to know what the benefit of spreading content over multiple domains is.

I would say from a cursory review that these forums are effectively a support forum for the web promotion bit of your overall web business though.

They are linked from the v7 site as such. You have chosen to split this aspect of your business off onto a different domain - presumably to facilitate direct linking to the boards, but it looks to me like the V7 site is the parent site and therefore the one that should be submitted.

The guidelines say that you should only submit your site to the one most appropriate category in topical. The V7 domain should be the one submitted IMO, and it should be submitted to the most appropriate web design cat for review.

I understand why, as a webmaster, you might want the seo forums listed separately in a forums cat on dmoz. But such a listing would really be down to an editor in a forums cat choosing to add your site there. The guidelines were toughened up because of the number of different domains people were spreading their businesses over - effectively the other domains are considered to be 'deeplinks' rather than different sites.

I guess you could always move this site to something like:

http://www.v7inc.com/forum/

and just have the internet-market-research domain do a framed redirect to that address.

Again, this is just the impression I got from a brief review, other editors' views may differ.

Cheers,

Andy

[sem4u]

They are different sites!

One is a web hosting service and the other is a free to use internet marketing forum.