So has anyone else about had it with DMOZ?

[cbp]

FYI, this might help clarify some of the misunderstandings about DMOZ submissions. This is a post I made elsewhere, so is slightly out of context as its commenting on an article that was linked previously, but hopefully it explains some more:

That is only the case if you consider DMOZ to be some sort of listing service - its not... as such the concept of a "backlog" does not really exist.

There is only a "backlog" at DMOZ if you consider DMOZ to be a listing service and the editors role being to process submissions - it is neither. Most critics and that author consider DMOZ to be a listing service ...they need to get over that. Many other directories provide that service. I fail to understand why so many complain about something that is not provided by DMOZ.

An editors role is to build a category of useful resources. The role is not to list every possible site on the topic of the category and its not to process submissions. Submitting a site is nothing more than a suggestion for the editor to consider (and editors are free to totally ignore all submissions, though most do not.)

To build a category an editor uses the following resources (for eg):
1. Personal knowledge
2. Following links on sites already listed and not listed
3. Searching Google and Yahoo, etc
4. Google alerts
5. Print advertisments; signs on trucks etc
6. Submmitted sites
7. Industry publications
8. etc

By submitting sites, you are doing nothing more than providing another means of assistance for a editor to find good sites. The problem is that the submitted sites is the worst source of good sites and is the most inefficient way for an editor to build a category. The best sites are probably never submitted (not every one has heard of DMOZ!) - they have just as much right to be considered for a listing to build a category of good resources as any site submitted. As they were not submitted, they are just a bit harder to find.

From this point of view the "backlog" at DMOZ is an irrelavant concept. The "backlog" really consists of the entire www of sites not listed.

DMOZ is NOT a listing service for webmasters. That servce is provided by a lot of other directories.

 

[GeorgeB.]

An editors role is to build a category of useful resources. The role is not to list every possible site on the topic of the category and its not to process submissions. Submitting a site is nothing more than a suggestion for the editor to consider (and editors are free to totally ignore all submissions, though most do not.)

And who decides what's useful?

"One man's trash is another man's treasure".

P.S. I didn't ignore your last post. I just decided that I've already said too much on that point. The people who made the statement are friends and frankly it's just not worth pissing them off (by getting them removed and betraying their confidence) just to prove my point. (if they read this thread after they're removed they'll know it was me) I don't bother submitting to DMOZ anymore so whether it lives or dies will pretty much remain something I'm unconcerned about. Just wanted it to be known that there ARE corrupt editors within DMOZ and to blow that off as a small issue or just something to be expected just furthers the mentality that started the backlash against it in the first place IMO.

 

[AWS]

I spent most of my time, over 6 years, at dmoz sniffing out abusers and removing them. I am a meta and I know for a fact that there are no, none, nada self interested metas.
The thing that pisses me off are threads like this saying this is happening and that is happening and this editor is abusing and that editor is abusing is no one supplies facts. They rant and rave shooting off their mouths and don't back it up with solid proof. If you have proof someone is abusing then report it using the public abuse report system. When you do have your facts straight.
Dmoz has been around for 7 years now and will still be here and relevent in 7 more. People have been saying it will die for 5 years now and guess what, it hasn't.

 

[The Sandman]

I suggest that anyone who has an issue with DMOZ read the posts in this thread by AWS and cbp carefully. Twice. Then, if you still have concerns, let's hear them. But from this point on I do not want to see unsubstantiated allegations, speculation, or mischaracterizations of DMOZ.

 

[cbp]

People have been saying it will die for 5 years now and guess what, it hasn't.

Do a google search for:
dmoz dead site:www.webmasterworld.com
Notice how old all those predictions of the end of DMOZ are ...

RE: Corruption.
There are a few corrupt policemen; a few corrupt teachers; even a few corrupt vicars. That does not mean the police, the schools and the church are corrupt. Same with DMOZ. There have been a few incidences of corruption that get dealt with. There are also a huge numer of unsubstantiated allegations in forums that no one backs up with evidence - it just amazes me that so many are willing to beleive them....I (and I assume a lot of others) would not be an editor if corruption was a problem.

There are also so may lies that I do not know what motivates people to make them up - I mod at an SEO forum. On another SEO forum I have been accused of PM's everyone who posted anything negative about DMOZ threatening to permanently ban them from DMOZ ... funny, they could produce no evidence when challenged (they just got cranky). Anyone familar with DMOZ wll know that that can not happen and AWS will know what would immediately happen to me if it was true.

I came across a claim in a forum recently that said something like that "its widely known that the average meta is making $200 000 a year" ... just don't figure (AWS --- can you make me a meta?) ... I hae no idea what motivates the bashers to come up with stuff like that? I suggested they make a complaint to the IRS ...

The point I am making ... nothing like the facts to ruin a good rant.

 

[dojo]

I wouldn't accuse anyone on DMOZ since I am not aware of the issues pointed out here, but I do hate seeing them moving so slowly. I know there are a lot of sites, but there should also be enough editors to cover the spaces. Having to wait for months and years to get my sites listed makes me just forget about DMOZ. And telling me about the fact I need quality sites and stuff like that can really make me angry since I do work for many hours a day on my projects and no one could come and say they are crap.

Anyway .. I have just stopped caring about this. I do submit to DMOZ since it's a reflex, but I couldn't care less about them indexing it. As long as they are moving as slow as snails I cannot lose my time caring about them

 

[cbp]

DMOZ adds 1000-2000 sites a day. How is that snail's pace? How many other directories come remotely close to matching that rate of growth?

 

[BamaStangGuy]

DMOZ adds 1000-2000 sites a day. How is that snail's pace? How many other directories come remotely close to matching that rate of growth?

Compared to how many submissions a day? Other sites do not recieve the near volume DMOZ does

 

[Libertate]

Thanks cbp for the clarification. It definitely calcifies my perception.

Sandman, I would be delighted to provide first-hand contacts, if they agree to it, and you are interested. Of course you could just google +dmoz +corrupt...

 

[cbp]

Compared to how many submissions a day?

Thats an irrevalent concept. Please see my post above re role of editor.

 

[SaN-DeeP]

Since last couple of years came across a lot of negative as well positive points about DMOZ.

End-Users who do not get there sites listed in dmoz start abusing.
People behind DMOZ doing a voluntary work, keep running dmoz..

As far as I have seen compared to rest of large directories on internet, Dmoz is completely FREE ! ?
It does not contains any sort of advertisements as well.

The story shall continue forever...
I tried submitting lot of domains to dmoz, few of them got accepted others got rejected as well, but why should i criticize about same ?

 

[cbp]

Since last couple of years came across a lot of negative as well positive points about DMOZ.

Don't forget almost all the negative ones are from SEO's/webmasters who are complaining about DMOZ not meeting their own SEO needs. DMOZ has never been in the business of providing that service --- it is somewhat paradoxical that people continue to complain about a service that DMOZ editors repeatedly tell them is not provided by DMOZ .... don't figure

 

[Libertate]

Don't forget almost all the negative ones are from SEO's/webmasters who are complaining about DMOZ not meeting their own SEO needs. DMOZ has never been in the business of providing that service --- it is somewhat paradoxical that people continue to complain about a service that DMOZ editors repeatedly tell them is not provided by DMOZ .... don't figure

The comment is slightly disengenuous. DMOZ indeed never explicitly states that they "providing that service".

Yet -

Getting Your Site Into Portals and Search Engines Using ODP Data

The paragraph in that document on DMOZ doesn't say - "you might get into other systems", or there is a "high chance".

It clearly states

... it may take anywhere from 2 weeks to several months for your site to be listed on partner sites which use the Open Directory data...

Sounds to me that they are saying it will get in to other partner sites. Only the time frame is in question.

Clearly DMOZ is fully aware of it's value to getting into other partner sites. If it is not an "implied service" of DMOZ, then why have a paragraph (albeit short) dedicated to this topic, with links to "Sites Using ODP Data" in their policy to Webmasters?

But... Dead horse.

I am sorry. I appreciate the altruistic idea to start ODP/DMOZ. Unfortunatelly, as with many things, we forget one minor detail that is the "monkey wrench" in all altruistic and sometimes utopian ideas. The monkey, err.. human factor.

p.s.: Not a lawyer. Just work with them all day. Rubs off on me.

 

[KeithMcL]

All I want to say is that I think the waiting period is too long. I've submitted a few sites over the years and never heard a thing. Never got any notification of any sort as to the result of my submission.

It's great that DMOZ is managing to process 1000-2000 sites a day, but I think they should consider looking or advertising for more people to fill editor roles.

I think this is what annoys those who submit their sites the most. Having to wait. If DMOZ could guarantee a waiting period of no more than say 6 months and also guarantee a reply to your submission, webmasters would be a lot happier.

 

[cbp]

You have fallen into that classic fallacy of misunderstanding DMOZ beng a listing service for SEO purposes. Its not. If it was, then those services you want (ie notifications; minimum waiting times etc) would be provided. Those servics are provided by directories that are listing services.

 

[cbp]

Some advice on now to get listed in DMOZ:

1. Have a site that is better than others listed in the category and adds value to the category. Its no use complaining because your competitors are there - you have to have something to offer to the category that others don't, otherwise why would DMOZ want to list you? Its all about unique content. (for a forum, there has to be enough posts and the forum look 'healthy' so the forum would be a valuable resoure if added to a category)
2. Write a perfect guideline compliant title and description - forget about marketing hype and keyword stuffing of title and description; I often just scan the pool of sites waiting for review and go straight to the ones that look as though I do not have to rewrite ....any kind of hype puts me off wanting to even look at the site --- I will get to the poor ones eventually, but move on to other priorities. The one with the marketing hype tend to be the poorer ones, so I would prefer not to waste my time.
3. Submit ONCE to the ONE best category. Submitting to multiple categories gets you labeled as a spammer (did you read the guidelines?); resubmitting just overwrites the previous submission with the new date, so if an editor sorts the pool by date (most do), you just moved yourself to the back of the list
4. Forget about it. There is absolutely nothing more you can do. Do not email editors; do not resubmit; do not get frustrated and stressed about it and don't pull your hair out (just look at the posts in forums!!!); do not etc .... get on with our life. ... there are pelnty of other directories out there that offer listings for SEO service --> use them.

It really is that simple.

 

[KeithMcL]

I often just scan the pool of sites waiting for review and go straight to the ones that look as though I do not have to rewrite ....any kind of hype puts me off wanting to even look at the site --- I will get to the poor ones eventually, but move on to other priorities. The one with the marketing hype tend to be the poorer ones, so I would prefer not to waste my time.

It's that kind of attitude that has webmasters annoyed with the dmoz editors. To me that sounds like you'll deal with the ones that involve less hassle than the others, regardless of when they were submitted - meaning if you don't like the submission, dealing with it could be put on the back burner forever i.e never getting a listing.

You have fallen into that classic fallacy of misunderstanding DMOZ beng a listing service for SEO purposes. Its not. If it was, then those services you want (ie notifications; minimum waiting times etc) would be provided. Those servics are provided by directories that are listing services.

Personally I think people should be informed of the result of their submission. How are they to know they got rejected? Or better yet, how are they to know what they can do to improve their website in order to get listed? Also, how are they to know when to submit again?

If what you're saying is "If you submit your site and we dont like it or the way in which you submitted it, we'll just just delete it like as if it was spam", then I certainly won't be bothering to submit my site(s) in the future. But I guess that's no skin of your nose. Just means less submissions for you to deal with, right?

 

[cbp]

It's that kind of attitude that has webmasters annoyed with the dmoz editors. To me that sounds like you'll deal with the ones that involve less hassle than the others, regardless of when they were submitted - meaning if you don't like the submission, dealing with it could be put on the back burner forever i.e never getting a listing.

Which is axactly the way DMOZ works. A listing service would not do that. I certainly would expect webmasters to be upset with an entity (ie DMOZ) that is not providing them with the service (ie a free listing for SEO purposes) that they want it to, when it is not in the business of providing that service. How do you react when someone complains to you about your business because you are not providing a service that they want, when you have never provided that kind of service?

As I said in a previous posts submitted sites are the worse source of new sites.

For eg, a while back I spent 3 hrs on a Sunday morning (while the wife washed the car) reviewing a pool of ~70 or so sites for a category I was newly permitted to edit in. I rejected >50 of them as crap; a dozen or so were part of a twisted SEO schemes; moved a couple to other categories and ended up listing just 2 and had to do a major rewrite of the description and title --- what an incredibiliy negative experience for a volunteer on a Sunday morning. After that was over I then searched Google - 10 minutes later I had listed 4 really good sites that were never submitted .. guess what editors, who are giving up there time, are better spending their time to help build a category of useful of resources.

Personally I think people should be informed of the result of their submission.

Why? DMOZ is not a listing service.
The real reason that does not happen is that DMOZ is under attack from spammers using devious schemes to get all sorts of listings for their sites. The consensus of editors is that they are better off not knowing they have been found and better to keep them guessing, so they do not try a differentapproach. The minority of idiots ruin it for the legimiate

How are they to know they got rejected?

You don't, but why is knowing that important? There is nothing you should or could be doing differently in your life if you were listed, rejected or still waiting.

Or better yet, how are they to know what they can do to improve their website in order to get listed? Also, how are they to know when to submit again?

Please don't resubmit. If I site is rejected, its very unlikely to be relistable.

Everything you are asking for here is still laboring under the misunderstanding that DMOZ provides some sort of listing service, when editors are repeatably stating that DMOZ does not provide that service .

 

[KeithMcL]

Please don't resubmit. If I site is rejected, its very unlikely to be relistable.

Not even if they site has undergone a major revamp - including design, content, anything else that might have caused it to be rejected?

Everything you are asking for here is still laboring under the misunderstanding that DMOZ provides some sort of listing service, when editors are repeatably stating that DMOZ does not provide that service.

Well then, maybe someone needs to write clearer information on exactly what the service is that DMOZ offers, because, imo, it's too vague. Instead of saying "we don't offer that service", maybe you should be saying "the service we offer is...".

 

[cbp]

There is plenty of information all over the place of what DMOZ is about if people care to read it. There is the social contract, the public editing guidelines, there are the FAQ's at DMOZ and resource zone, there are the guidelines, there are conditions you agree to when you submit a site, editors (and some non-editors) make it clear in forums what its about, there are several websites about it ... I do not know of any other directory or search engine that makes so much information public.
Here is just one snippet from one of them:

We aren't a search engine and pride ourselves on being highly selective. We don't accept all sites, so please don't take it personally should your site not be accepted. Our goal is to make the directory as useful as possible for our users, not to have the directory include all (or even most) of the sites that could possibly be listed or serve as a promotional tool for the entities listed.

(this is the second paragraph under 'submtting a site'