SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 76
  1. #26
    l 0 l silver trophybronze trophy lo0ol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Palo Alto
    Posts
    5,329
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why does this come as a suprise to anyone? Who relies on DMOZ anyway nowadays?

  2. #27
    Non-Member DaveMichaels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    535
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've been trying to submit a site for the past few days and it's been broken - the browser just spins indefinitely and never gets to the confirmation page.

  3. #28
    SitePoint Wizard samsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    5,011
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lo0ol
    Why does this come as a suprise to anyone? Who relies on DMOZ anyway nowadays?
    http://www.bruceclay.com/searchengin...nshipchart.htm
    Using your unpaid time to add free content to SitePoint Pty Ltd's portfolio?

  4. #29
    l 0 l silver trophybronze trophy lo0ol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Palo Alto
    Posts
    5,329
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, whatever. I still don't think DMOZ matters anymore.

  5. #30
    Intoxicated with the madness petertdavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    7,497
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JakeCop
    Well, maybe you or anyone here can answer me this. I submitted www.whatdvd.net to Dmoz back in April, and I've just been told it has been declined because it doesn't have any original content: http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13831

    Can anyone see the content on www.whatdvd.net?

    It doesn't matter what you have on the site. DMOZ won't look past the Amazon affiliate links.

  6. #31
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    northolt
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Dmoz is no more wanted

    I agree with you guys.

    Dmoz is now ruled by the editors who would not let you apply for a new editorial post at any cost.

    I submitted my sites to Dmoz ages ago - no replies, tried contacting the editor, still no luck. Applied for the editorial post again no luck.

    End result: DmoZ ---> bye bye

  7. #32
    Technical Director at StuckOn JakeCop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    Posts
    765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by racerman28
    Jake,

    That post by hutcheson reminds me of my SOON TO BE ex wife....

    Me: *looks at green colored wall* 'Look, the color of that wall is green.'

    Ex-Wife: 'No it's not...it's red!'

    Nuff said.

    Sounds stupid, but that's exactly what he's done. Trouble is, their self moderating, self policing service has left me with no course of action. My site has been declined, the editor has said it has no content and that's that.

    I have emailed Google and asked them if they plan to continue using Dmoz in the future, I doubt they'll tell me, but you never know. What else can I do? Put a big arrow on each page saying 'CONTENT HERE - DMOZ MORONS'?

    And before anyone tells me that was childish, and there's no need to make flippant comments like that, what more can you do when someone buries their head in the sand singing 'la la la - there is no content' when it's right there in front of them?

    I feel the urge to kill.

  8. #33
    Technical Director at StuckOn JakeCop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    Posts
    765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by petertdavis
    It doesn't matter what you have on the site. DMOZ won't look past the Amazon affiliate links.
    Amazon affiliate links shouldn't be a problem, as I pointed out in the thread on the boards every site in that category has either Amazon, or Adsense or both. Affiliate links are allowed as long as there is sufficient original content.

    Sadly, my site has no content whatsoever.

  9. #34
    SitePoint Addict Tim_Rogovets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Odessa, Ukraine
    Posts
    221
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IMHO DMOZ need to somehow reorganize the internal work of the editors... From what I see, they've got enough volunteers to do the job required.. But looks like their job is not well-organized and this causes time delays.

    From what I see now, they neither succeed in moderating current listings (I see dead or almost dead sites there). nor they succeed in correctly and efficiently reviewing new submissions.

    Perhaps they need some advice from Sitepoint staff on how to organize the community and work of moderators ?
    CEO of Grandiz! - a team based in Odessa, Ukraine.
    Designing and developing sophisticated web apps on CodeIgniter!

  10. #35
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    49
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So here's the issue: DMOZ is a mess, hard to get listed etc.,

    We all only bother about DMOZ because of Google using it!

    So lets all start a giant petition to Google to dump DMOZ (or somehow sort it out) - it shouldn't be that hard with all our blogs and word of mouth.

  11. #36
    SitePoint Evangelist Backlinker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I really don't see the point. It would be no good Google using an automated directory, it wouldn't give them any more than they already had and it would be to easy to spam. And any other human edited directory would soon be suffering the same huge backlog that Dmoz does when people started submitting there instead.

    The problem ( if you can call it a problem ) is that the dmoz staff and editors do not see the diectory in the same way that everyone else does.

    Dmoz editors are there to build a good human edited directory. How the editors do this is up to them and there are many different ways. going through the lists of submitted sites is only one way and it is considered by many not to be the best way.

    There is a simple dichotomy. editors want to list the sites they feel will improve their directory.... Webmasters want to list their sites because it helps with Google.

    Webmasters ( for the most part ) do not give a damn about dmoz itself, they just want to get every one of their sites listed in it as many times as possible because google use it.

    Dmoz, on the other hand, do not give a damn about Google because googles use of the directory is incidental. It was around before google and it will ( may ) be around after google.

    This may be a purist ( or purile ) way of looking at things because obviously many of the dmoz editors are also only there because of google but the fact remains that dmoz is not there to help anyone do well in google. It is there in and for its own right and no directory set up just to service google could survive because if google pulled out they would lose their reason for existing.

    Graham
    Regards. Graham
    Buy, Sell, Talk And Learn About Antique British Ceramics.
    Abcir.org -
    Ceramtique.com - AbcirGroupForums.co.uk

  12. #37
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    49
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How the editors do this is up to them and there are many different ways
    That would appear to be the problem. There seems to be no real system in place in regards to how dmoz editors work. In business it can't be a hit-and-miss approach like this - not knowing what's going on, relying on the personal whims of an editor.

    Why can't dmoz have a set policy in place that all editors adhere to. And that everyone knows about. What's wrong with first-come, first-serve etc.,

    Or out of left-field: why doesn't Google set up its own (dmoz-like) human edited service and organize it in a proper fashion. It seems Google - as a very large listed company now - they can't rely on a volunteer-based service that doesn't seem to be able to keep up.

    IMHO, it just appears that DMOZ has been unable to scale their activities into what they have become: hugely popular

    My feeling, reading other posts on the whole dmoz issue (from a number of forums) is that the vast majority of webmasters would wash their hands of DMOZ if Google stopped using them.



    .

  13. #38
    SitePoint Zealot nkisberg2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    151
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm a DMOZ editor myself and I'd just like to point out one thing.

    All the people who are moaning are the ones that either got rejected, or submitted to the WRONG category. Submit to the correct category with a GOOD description (i.e read the submission guidelines) and you'll be in fairly quickly. Trust me on this one, most editors go through the waiting list and look for ones that need less attention to quickly accept. Read all the guidelines and the category description and make sure you're submitting to the correct one, you may wait two or three weeks to be put to the back of another long queue. Be warned.

  14. #39
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,449
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    That's good advice. I'm willing to bet a lot of the sites that wait a long time tried to be "spammy" in their submission in the hopes of boosting the SE rankings.

  15. #40
    SitePoint Zealot nkisberg2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    151
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Definitely, I think I've only ever seen a few sites that submit with the correct description, in the right place and I've accepted them within a day or two.

  16. #41
    SitePoint Zealot number7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Virtual City, Neural Networks str. 7
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fire and Forget Website listing at DMOZ Agree ?

  17. #42
    Technical Director at StuckOn JakeCop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    Posts
    765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Backlinker1

    It is there in and for its own right and no directory set up just to service google could survive because if google pulled out they would lose their reason for existing.
    Interesting that you say that. I wonder how many submission requests Dmoz would get if Google stopped using it? Would we all be bothering to talk about it here?

    I think the idea behind Dmoz is a good one, and they do have a huge amount of submissions to sift through, much of them spam wrongly submitted or submitted multiple times. That makes their job hard, no doubt. I don't understand though why they can't acknowledge a mistake.

    To err is human, they're a human edited directory, but they're behaving like an automated one.

  18. #43
    SitePoint Evangelist Backlinker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    OK
    I will start this off again by saying that I am talking for myself, not dmoz.

    what would happen to dmoz if google pulled out ? well, from the point of view of the number of submissions, they would probably drop off quite a bit, but there would still be a lot of people after the PR that they provide. Most ( or at least, many ) of the editors would not be concerned as they do not consider submissions as being the best way to populate the directory anyway.

    the fact that you think most webmasters would not bother with dmoz if google pulled out just goes to emphazise what I have said several times throughout this thread. webmasters dont give a castlemain four x (XXXX ) about dmoz anyway, they are just interested in the google link and the PR...... so why do you expect dmoz to be overly interested in your needs and desires ?

    as for them admitting to their mistakes..... I would hope that everyone, dmoz or otherwise, would admit to their own mistakes.... but from whoes viewpoint was it a mistake ? ( and I am not talking about your specific incident, I know nothing about that )

    graham
    Regards. Graham
    Buy, Sell, Talk And Learn About Antique British Ceramics.
    Abcir.org -
    Ceramtique.com - AbcirGroupForums.co.uk

  19. #44
    SitePoint Evangelist Backlinker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It is also worth noting that the dmoz editors are advised ( not forbidden, just advised ) not to enter into conversation with submitters. this might seem a little strange on the face of it but apparently there have been numerous cases of abuse and even death threats ( ) to editors who have not listed duff sites that webmasters would like listed.

    I freely admit that I was drawn to editing at dmoz because I had a site in the waiting pile for over a year, when I got in I put in a fair amount of work with the other sites waiting before I listed mine, and I stay there now because I think the directory is a good idea and I want to be a part of it.... but i wouldn't expect to put up with a lot of crap from webmasters who wanted to buck the system ( not talking about you jake cop ).

    Graham
    Regards. Graham
    Buy, Sell, Talk And Learn About Antique British Ceramics.
    Abcir.org -
    Ceramtique.com - AbcirGroupForums.co.uk

  20. #45
    Technical Director at StuckOn JakeCop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    Posts
    765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Backlinker1
    OK

    as for them admitting to their mistakes..... I would hope that everyone, dmoz or otherwise, would admit to their own mistakes.... but from whoes viewpoint was it a mistake ? ( and I am not talking about your specific incident, I know nothing about that )
    If you're not talking about my specific incident, how can I tell you from whose viewpoint it was a mistake? Either we're discussing my site in particular, or we're not. As I mentioned earlier, the editor said my site had no content, that's the mistake.

    So you listed your own site on Dmoz? They've thrown editors off for that, or so they claim. I'm not having a pop you understand, as I'm sure you were fair as you said, but former editors have revealed on this forum that they've been banned for listing their own sites.

  21. #46
    Ex-SitePointer silver trophy
    iFroggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Harbinger, NC, U.S.A.
    Posts
    4,126
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My thinking is probably the same as most of you. If I can get a DMOZ listing, fine. If I can't, fine. I'll submit once and forget about it. If it ever gets added, cool. If not, well, that's the way it goes. I do not believe all DMOZ editors are evil, I believe most people are good... but, there are some that (because of their influence or maybe not) spoil the system.

    I have seen (I believe) the single greatest and most obvious abuse of power that is possible within the DMOZ system, which is someone removing my site and adding their site with the exact same subject manner right in its place, but no one really cares. If anyone important at DMOZ reads this thread and truly does, I'd be glad to share it privately.

  22. #47
    SitePoint Addict Hajduk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Behind you
    Posts
    357
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    DMOZ is for me a site/organization that never writes/wrote back. I dont know their editors, never got a reply to my emails. After a while they listed me. But, if I check my site stats, I think I got like 10 linkthroughs in 1 year from them. ( couple of them were me)

  23. #48
    SitePoint Guru quenting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    735
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    while i won't argue on Jake's specific case, i'll just say that i agree with what most backlinkers said, and add a few things:



    From what I see, they've got enough volunteers to do the job required..
    this is wrong. this actually is DMOZ's biggest problem, not to have enough active editors to do the job. Many categories do not have an editor, and many categories' editors have stopped actually editing, this being even worse because seing a name on the bottom of the page prevents new potential editors from applying.
    The number of editors at the bottom o the home page is the all-time total editors, the actual number of active editors is much, much smaller.



    I have, in fact, applied to be a category editor several times and was rejected EVERY time. And I wasn't applying to promote myself either. Again, not complaining here just stating some facts.
    well, this is probably that your application was not good. There are strong rules on what sites to list, and how to list them and if you fail to respect these rules when applying you will be rejected. These rules also apply when requested new categories, and I have seen senior editors with several thousands edits being rejected for a new category application because they mis-capped the title or made a typo in the description of one of the sites in their submission. The policy is that if you don't want to spend the time to write a good application and find 3 good sites to include in the category you target (not including yours), you're not likely to become an active editor and will most likely vanish once your own site is listed.

    For my own categories (two relatively large forum categories), about 90% of the sites are misplaced, about 60% of the sites are forums with less than 10 posts, resulting in less than 2% of the submitted sites becoming listed.
    On thesse 2%, none have a proper title/description.
    If the site owner doesn't want to spend the few minutes it takes to find the right category, and write a proper title/description, it doesn't help giving motivation to the editor to list the site. I have written a small guide giving some advice to get your site listed more easily, with an editor's perspective on things. If all this basic advice was followed, the reviewing and listing process would be much faster.

    Overall, the people seing their sites rejected are the one always complaining about dmoz, and i doubt any sort of petition would see great success, because there are so many webmasters who benefit from their listings. I don't say things are perfect of course, there are many problems with dmoz, it has an archaic structure, the underlying technology is obsolete (filesystem based), there are not enough editors, and the listings miss basic stuff like sorting/rating/comenting options, still there is not equivalent directory on the web.
    The largest message boards on the web !
    unblog.fr, hosting 700000 french blogs

  24. #49
    SitePoint Guru quenting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    735
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    DMOZ is for me a site/organization that never writes/wrote back. I dont know their editors, never got a reply to my emails. After a while they listed me. But, if I check my site stats, I think I got like 10 linkthroughs in 1 year from them. ( couple of them were me)
    There is a general advice not to answer email complaints/requests made directly to an editor because they bring more bad than good. I personally choose to answer all the emails i receive. Some other editors might choose not to do so.
    The greatests benefits you'll get from dmoz are not clickthroughs, they are mostly from the number of links to your site you get from being listed in it and the resulting benefits you get in the popular search engines from these links.
    The largest message boards on the web !
    unblog.fr, hosting 700000 french blogs

  25. #50
    SitePoint Addict Hajduk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Behind you
    Posts
    357
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Okay, but I remember a while ago I applied to become an editor. Nothing happened, so I guess they are doing fine with the amount of editors then??


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •