Why DMOZ is more important than ever

PhilC · 06-09-2004, 07:37 AM

Quote:

I just found out that Yahoo is using DMOZ's open directory project in it's search technology ... (remember that Yahoo still gives a lot more relevance to content and is still a very popular search engine ...)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overture

Yahoo! leverages the Open Directory Project (ODP) to further improve the user experience on distribution partner sites. ODP title, description and category meta data is used to enhance Yahoo!'s relevant search results. (emphasis mine)

You can visit the page here : http://snipurl.com/dmozyahoo [overture]

For those who came late, Google too uses DMOZ to index sites. Infact, it is one of the surefire ways to get found by Google.

Another reason to submit your site to DMOZ. Remember that most sites get delayed or rejected because the submitters are too lazy to follow the guidelines.

GeXus · 06-09-2004, 08:27 AM

Now the real question is when is DMOZ going to get their act together and begin to accually add sites....

PhilC · 06-09-2004, 08:49 AM

Cut them some slack. Most of the editors work for free. Sites get delayed because the submitters don't follow the guidelines laid. I recently submitted a site, and made some serious mistakes. Its safe to assume that its not going to be published in the near future!

Most of the delay is also because of quality concerns. I appreciate that they do what they do for free while still maintaining quality.

PaulHarris · 06-09-2004, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Now the real question is when is DMOZ going to get their act together and begin to accually add sites....

actually I agree, They visited my site 3 times now (shown from logs) and havnt added it. I have been to the forum and asked about its status......

still awaiting review.

Is there anythign wrong with it I ask them - A meta editor viewed it personally and said - no it seems real good....

it's still not in. DMOZ is a joke. They turn themself into a must have directory for webmasters, then the only people who get listed either know the editor or become an editor.

ferret77 · 06-09-2004, 09:12 AM

yeah what is the deal wiht dmoz the editors are mostly self important dickheads, they act like they are gods gift to the intenet

GoldDust · 06-09-2004, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldSocks

They turn themself into a must have directory for webmasters

Dmoz making them selves into a must have directory is very cleaver marketing.

Maybe we can learn a thing or to from the "Must Have".

I mean, if only we could turn our web sites into a "Must Have" site for other webmasters. Although I do know DMoz is on a bigger level than your avarage directory, but im sure we can learn a thing or too about uniqueness in branding. maybe this post belongs in the marketing forum.

Gold

PaulHarris · 06-09-2004, 09:17 AM

i never said it wasn't clever

I said it was annoying........

GoldDust · 06-09-2004, 09:23 AM

No worries Oldsocks,

I wasn't refering to you saying Dmoz was cleaver. I was mearly saying that there are thousands of webmasters working day n night to try to get into Dmoz. thinking its the answer to their ranking problems......

thats annoying to me, becasue it's just not true...

To be frank, I have achived top rankings on competitive keywords & keyphrases without even going near DMOZ - so, in effect the marketing of "DMOZ as being a "MUST HAVE DIRECTORY" as you mentiond is my point not that their cleaver.

To be honest, I dont really care if Dmoz is needed or not rightnow! Whats inportant IMO is learning from those organisations & leading web sites that are succsessful & dmoz as a whole ARE very succsessful.

PhilC · 06-09-2004, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldSocks

Is there anythign wrong with it I ask them - A meta editor viewed it personally and said - no it seems real good....

I am no expert on DMOZ ... but I don't belive content of a site is the reason why most sites aren't listed ... More likely,

--> You either didn't submit the site in the right category (DMOZ is vast and it can be a real pain to find the right category)

--> You title and description must have been off.

awall19 · 06-09-2004, 01:11 PM

content is a huge issue with some editors. especially in fields where many site in a box affiliate sites pop up.

thebassman · 06-09-2004, 02:40 PM

I've been waiting for PhotographyCorner to get added for 45+ days now... grrr...

PaulHarris · 06-09-2004, 03:57 PM

Quote:

--> You title and description must have been off.

probably this - only really one category available for a celeb wallpaper site

celebrities - wallpapers.....

But if they don't like my description - they can feel free to write their own

dave conz · 06-09-2004, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferret77

yeah what is the deal wiht dmoz the editors are mostly self important dickheads, they act like they are gods gift to the intenet

No, most of us don't. Most of us quietly work away in the background trying to make the internet a better place.

BTW, I became an editor after complaining about the lack of activity in the category I had submitted to. Someone suggested I help instead of complain, so I did.

PhilC · 06-09-2004, 11:25 PM

Just what I was about to say too dave conz ... I just made another post somewhere saying, 'Hot air doesn't change the world.' Guess its applicable here too ...
oldsocks, just remeber that you aren't doing their directory any great favor, by contributing your site to it. Your comment about '... they can feel free to write their own' proves what I said earlier ... most submissions get rejected due to the laziness of the submitter ...

awall19 · 06-09-2004, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfxmystica

just remeber that you aren't doing their directory any great favor, by contributing your site to it.

this theory is actually just the opposite of what Bruce Stone explained to me in an interview earlier this week.

there are good categories and bad. good editors and bad. I have come to except it as that and realize they are a potential inbound link to sites. if they help me out its great. if they dont then oh well.

I have pointed out exceptionally rude behavior of some editors if for no other reason than to let that editor know they were rude and they reflected a poor image on the ODP, but typically most editors are not pig headed and most people who complain the most usually have the least resourceful resources.

PhilC · 06-10-2004, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awall19

this theory is actually just the opposite of what Bruce Stone explained to me in an interview earlier this week.

um .. Who is Bruce Stone?

PaulHarris · 06-10-2004, 03:34 AM

Quote:

they can feel free to write their own' proves what I said earlier ... most submissions get rejected due to the laziness of the submitter ...

Actually this isn't laziness. This is them not giving a deffinaitve understanding of what they expect in titles and descriptions.

I have read titles and descriptions in the directory relevant to my category, I have read the guidelines and faq's, i have read the notes on how to become an editor and what titles and descriptions should look like, so laziness? I think not.

It's just every editor is different and no matter what guidelines say, he has his own idea of what he's looking for.

webmastery · 06-10-2004, 04:04 AM

DMOZ should not be considered important. The link is not that worthwhile. Its generally a low PR link on a page with millions of others. I find the average DMOZ editor to be an arrogant, corrupt webmaster who is running the category for his own benefit.

Let DMOZ die.

awall19 · 06-10-2004, 07:44 AM

Bruce Stone is the owner of wow directory

driglaz · 06-10-2004, 08:24 AM

Is the dmoz more important now or just as important as it always was?