There was an article about DMOZ about a week ago that wasn't very flattering.
The editors in the RZ are still busy chatting away about it.
I have seen that article published on many websites but it seems the ODP editors think it was penned by SR.
Check it out, they are really proving what goofs they all are.
Have fun!!
Dan
http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/show … hp?t=45803

Well the truth is always hard to swallow, especially if you are affiliated with DMOZ

Well.. it was great LINK BAIT for SR .... up until the point you posted a LIVE link and made it into a Recip... ha ha ha ha ha ha... J/K

Yeah, browsed a few pages...intense bunch there....  oh well... on with my night..thanks for the entertainment though :0)

interesting discussion they have there

dann wrote:

I have seen that article published on many websites but it seems the ODP editors think it was penned by SR.

They need to understand SR doesn't necessarily support the views or opinions reflected by the authors of the articles we publish.

We aim to inform our audience from different angles. People must understand different points of view, do their homework and only then form educated decisions/opinions.

If anyone from DMOZ or elsewhere wishes to send in a quality article with different suggestions (points of view) related to this topic, SR would gladly review/publish it.

I rather agreed with most of what the author said. The comments on the other forum were natural defensive comments and did not addrerss the points made an any focussed fashion

dann wrote:

    I have seen that article published on many websites but it seems the ODP editors think it was penned by SR.

That's my point!
And it has degraded into the same old condescending remarks by editors who think they have knowledge of all information and everyone is out to scam their directory.
I have sites that got listed in a matter of days and then and I also have sites sitting in the "queue" for years.
If they would extend their volunteer time editing instead of endlessly arguing the same garbage over and over in that stupid forum, they may make progress.
I don't go there very often and I am an editor of a small category(shoot me ok) as you all know submit and editor login are broke and have been for over a month. That's why I ended up there.
Not my usual stomping grounds, I have seen the endless posts of the same crap too many times. The attitudes of the senior editors is revolting and discourages a junior soon to be former editor from trying to do anything.
So after three tries I am accepted as an editor. Not one site I approved ever made it past the "METAS".
F*** it. They are a secret society bent on controlling the Internet?
Well it's a theory anyway, I haven't seen evidence to prove me otherwise.
Shame is they are losing their importance. If AOL/Netscape 10% Google can't fix their website in a month I guess it must not be very high on the priority list.
SR Rules
Dan

Edit: BTW nice post Nic. Quite possibly the most sensible one I have ever seen on that forum.

I actually got involved with the editors on another thread where that article came up.  My experience?  They simply didn't want to listen to any outside advice and pigeon-holed all advice as stuff they've heard before (maybe they have, but it sure didn't seem as if they were even willing to consider a new point of view). 

From an SEO standpoint (which they generally dislike strongly) DMOZ is only of marginal value - its a link among thousands of links that one can get to their site.  I have sites listed there and can tell you that the traffic value of a link at DMOZ is really nothing noteworthy (far less than 1% of my traffic).  I get far more traffic from two Wikipedia links than I do from DMOZ.

So the question comes down to this - if DMOZ has little traffic value, what value does it really have?  Some would argue SEO, but I think that's pretty marginal at best.  So is it really worth our time and energy?  I personally don't think so.

Thanks, Nic, for visiting RZ.  Nice post.

The difficulty, for me (as an ODP editor), lies in the constant attacks from inside and outside DMOZ as to the purpose of the project, and exactly whom the Directory was created to benefit. Consequently, I probably do not always respond as well as I could.

I attempted to converse with members here about DMOZ in another thread and it didn't accomplish anything. One point I would like to make about the threads at RZ and editor responses - after answering the same questions, for years in some cases, it's understandable that occasionally a human being might lose patience. Not to mention, there are posters at RZ who seem to join simply to take potshots at the Directory and its editors.

The ODP, in my experience, is not a primadonna group that is deaf to the needs of websurfers, for whom we attempt to compile a directory of useful information.  At no point was the goal to list every site on the Internet; there are search engines that serve that purpose.

Frankly, I don't understand how someone who is an editor can fail to understand the intent of the ODP. And why, if that dissatisfied, they would not be working, inside the Directory, to help improve where they believe it fails in its mission.  But that's just me, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

*********************************

(to Dann:  FWIW - it has been my experience in 1 1/2 years, that editors with higher permissions do not delist guidelines-compliant listings. If there is criticism of what sites an editor lists, it is usually because mistakes were made and, most likely, was an attempt to help a newer editor learn.)

(to SiteReference:  IMHO, from an SEO standpoint, the ODP / DMOZ doesn't intend to be of use to webmasters. It never did, as far as I know.    This appears to be the misunderstanding that causes 99%-100% of the disagreements between editors and webmasters.)

*********************************

Thank you again for posting, Nic.  (And forgive the lengthy post.)  I hope that someone, with better writing skills than I possess, will submit that article soon and look forward to any discussion that might follow.

I could go into a lengthy rant here but I will hold back and keep it short.

I laugh every time I see or hear Open Directory Project. This has got to be the most closed project I have ever heard of.
"We need volunteers - Sorry you have been rejected - feel free to reapply - sorry you have been rejected"

Jules wrote:

exactly whom the Directory was created to benefit

If the purpose has not turned to the SE's, then who? People do not use directories as they use to since it is so much faster and easier to use one of the SE's.

Jules wrote:

it's understandable that occasionally a human being might lose patience

The same for those of us on the outside of dmoz. We continuously get no answers or loosely scripted answers from those on the inside. Should we take the word of a dmoz person as gospel and swallow our own words and thoughts as crap because dmoz says we do not understand. I may be wrong here but in order to understand things questions need to be asked and quality answers given and understood.

Jules wrote:

The ODP, in my experience, is not a primadonna group that is deaf to the needs of websurfers

Will jump out here so feel free to slam me. If site owners and webmasters stopped visiting dmoz, I believe there would be very little traffic on dmoz. People are using SE's.

Jules wrote:

Frankly, I don't understand how someone who is an editor can fail to understand the intent of the ODP. And why, if that dissatisfied, they would not be working, inside the Directory, to help improve where they believe it fails in its mission.

There have been many of us who have applied and were rejected more than once. How can we assist and share if not given the opportunity?

dmoz wrote:

Do not disguise your submission and submit the same URL more than once.
Example: [http://www.dmoz.org] and [http://www.dmoz.org/index.html]

With this rule, how does a site get listings with inside pages or multiple listings, unless an editor has turned an eye for one reason or another to either place them or allow them to be placed?

I think that getting someone who is totally unbiased to go into the directory and clean it up would be the best thing dmoz could do. I am sure that G would have some people that fall into this unbiased category. Another suggestion, since new submissions cannot be received, why don't you and some of the other "reliable" editors start going through and deleting irrelevant and/or duplicate sites from the directory?

By doing something as simple as suggested could go a long ways to becoming a respectable directory again.

Hopefully someone from dmoz will step down to the rest of us and write an article. I for one would look forward to reading it.

jmarkafghans, I do understand having to wait for consideration to get listed, but I am not sure your group understands people. When a year or more lapses without hearing or seeing anything, how do you think people feel?

But my bitterness today comes from something you said in one of your own posts. “If there's a category that you feel needs help - apply to be an editor.”  http://forums.site-reference.com/viewto … 95&p=2

A ways back I figured that since a year has come and gone I would apply for my category, after all it is my area of expertise, plus there was no editor assigned, nor is there one now.

My application was followed by the “smack down” email from a DMOZ editor. rather than go into the gory details I will search for it and post it. It is one of the most condescending emails I have ever read.

I have employees and they make mistakes and oversights but I would never shame them, I would work with them on identifying and correcting the problem.

why would somebody offer services they can't fully do? Why would DMOZ offer webmasters/website owners to list their websites and yet don't? In the case of DMOZ editors, why would somebody volunteer to a work s/he can't fulfill? just because it's free or voluntary doesn't mean you will perform the task only when you feel you like to. Where's the sense of dedication to our work there? I have been a volunteer to a civic organization, and I always see to it that I spend some quality time to the job I have pledged to do voluntarily. To help the people I promised to help when I enlisted as a volunteer.

I guess it was just right they closed down a section of the forum where editors interact with site owners and webmasters. It ate-up most of their time, quality time that could have been used to review websites submitted for enlistment. Hopefully the editors would stand up the work they have volunteered for.

Thank you so much for responding!  I will answer each question as honestly and fully, as I possibly can. If, however, I miss any - please slap my hand and remind me to answer them. (Okay?)   Note:  I do not make policy; I will simply give my best interpretation of what I have learned - and the guiding principles by which I edit.

ColoEagle wrote:

I laugh every time I see or hear Open Directory Project. This has got to be the most closed project I have ever heard of.

The Open in the ODP is a definition of the availability of the Directory to anyone who wishes to use that information. Think OpenOffice.org or Firefox - they are Open in the same way that the information from the ODP is Open.

ColoEagle wrote:

If the purpose has not turned to the SE's, then who? People do not use directories as they use to since it is so much faster and easier to use one of the SE's.

I, honestly, cannot speak to how websurfers surf. But, I can say, that the goal of the ODP is to create a directory, not to duplicate any of the myriad of search engines available. Whether that might, in anyone's eyes, make the Project a dinosaur is always open for discussion. We editors, by and large, don't think so.

ColoEagle wrote:

I may be wrong here but in order to understand things questions need to be asked and quality answers given and understood.

How can I help? Seriously! (Promise me that if my answers aren't what someone 'wants' to hear, that you won't beat me too badly?!)

ColoEagle wrote:

There have been many of us who have applied and were rejected more than once. How can we assist and share if not given the opportunity?

Many current editors were rejected more than once. The goal is to learn from the information given in the 'rejection' (Lord, I hate that word.) email and apply again.  I, please note, do not review or approve editor applications.

ColoEagle wrote:

dmoz wrote:

Do not disguise your submission and submit the same URL more than once.
    Example: [http://www.dmoz.org] and [http://www.dmoz.org/index.html]

With this rule, how does a site get listings with inside pages or multiple listings, unless an editor has turned an eye for one reason or another to either place them or allow them to be placed?

This is not addressing 'inside pages' or 'multiple listings' - it is asking that webmasters / site owners do not suggest the same site twice.  I hope that no one here would argue that the 2 URLs in the above example point to the same site. {More to follow - as I need to log-off for a bit.}

waveshoppe wrote:

My application was followed by the “smack down” email from a DMOZ editor. rather than go into the gory details I will search for it and post it. It is one of the most condescending emails I have ever read.

Please [modified]PM me[/modified] - I would love to see what you received. If it was a "smack down" - as opposed to the standard email explaining why your application was not approved - that needs to be addressed, because that is NOT what is supposed to be the response.

As I currently share a computer with my fiance, I must stop this post for now.  I will be back in a bit to make sure that I am answering / addressing questions.

Thank you for giving me the chance to respond.

Hey Jules

I just want to thank you for your contributions. There are close to 1000 views to the SR Blast thread in RZ and you’re the only one that’s come over to try and shed some light from your side.

To me, that speak volumes of your character. I hope to be able to chat it up in a constructive manner with you soon.

Been bogged down with a crazy “honey-do” list this weekend so please allow me some time to wash my gardening hands and get back to you…


With lots of respect

Nic

Oh, heavens! Plant a coleus or two for me, please, Nic?!

jmarkafghans, I am still looking for the email but I fear I may have archived it in some unknown place, any way if you keep records here is your reference ID: opendir - 1923bb0b9a00f9e1527593d8a28d1278

waveshoppe -

I do not review or approve editor applications, so I do not have access to that area of the ODP.  I can tell you that (as far as I know) the number you have posted is the initial 'code' generated automatically by the application system. Once you respond to the email that you received with that code, the application then enters an area where meta editors can see, review and respond to your application.

My apologies for not being able to help.

No biggie jmarkafghans, I moved on. But I do want to thank you for being human.

And I would like to ask you - waveshoppe - to not give up on the ODP.

Please apply again [added]when the system is back up[/added].  We need people who care.

Okay - let's see if I can answer a few more questions -

ColoEagle wrote:

Will jump out here so feel free to slam me. If site owners and webmasters stopped visiting dmoz, I believe there would be very little traffic on dmoz. People are using SE's.

Jump away! Glad to hear honest opinions! I have no issue with your beliefs, CE - may whatever higher power you believe in slap me hard upside my head if I were to post anything to the contrary. I, also, do not have any statistics regarding who visits the ODP.   IMHO, the ODP is meant to be a resource for websurfers, looking for information. It was never meant to be a resource for site owners, webmasters, and black-hat SEO.

<dmoz hat off>I mention black-hat SEO because being a member of this forum and reading threads about SEO has taught me a lot about how honest SEO works. If more people would read some of the SEO threads in this forum, (there are some incredibly honest, helpful people here involved in SEO) they would realize that DMOZ and SEO aren't actually that far apart.<dmoz hat back on>

ColoEagle wrote:

Another suggestion, since new submissions cannot be received, why don't you and some of the other "reliable" editors start going through and deleting irrelevant and/or duplicate sites from the directory?

Unfortunately, the server problem that has made suggestions impossible, also prohibits any editing.

For now, I have to run.  Please let me know how else I can help, what questions you would like for me to try to answer, or if you think I'm just full of (to quote a recent post) shullbit.

I tip my hat and would like to thank you Jules for participating. At least we know that there is one dmoz editor who has character, a valid concern and willingness to help.

As for me personally, I was rejected three times over + or - 18 months. Kind of like baseball, 3 strikes and I'm outa there. A person shouldn't have to beg to volunteer their services.

jmarkafghans wrote:

(Promise me that if my answers aren't what someone 'wants' to hear, that you won't beat me too badly?!)

Promise I will only use an air bat   I don't want you to tell me what you think I want to hear, I want to learn, so tell me the facts, without political tongue in cheek jargon.

Looking forward to more from you.

Jody