Thread: DMOZ: The Great Pumpkin

Originally Posted by bogart

It seems to me that the biggest issue is that there just isn't any room to add millions of new websites to the ODP.in a 1990's style directory.



If the category doesn't have an editor, you are wasting your time.

The ODP's value as a quality factor is diminishing just for the fact it is rarely updated.

One day we believe that AOL will give us a new site, but one day.

How can a category not have an editor when we have over 200 editors who can edit everywhere in the directory and any editor higher up the tree can edit in sub categories. In fact we are positively discouraged from being 'named' at the foot of every page we can edit in, if we can edit 'from above', it can put off someone from applying to edit in that category.

But y ou seem to have an interesting attitude, you want to become an editor in an outdated (your idea not mine) directory. Sounds to me that you want to be an editor, not for the good of the directory or to build categories for other surfers, but to get a site listed. If you get an application through and you give a whiff of that then you will certainly be rejected.

Mia said

So in other words, I too am still included in that number

Now I understand your venom to DMOZ

Originally Posted by Anonymously

You did not answer my question about how many you had to deal with, I think you have to tel us if that is hundreds a day or a decade.

I ahve not personally been threatened at home but we have editors who have. They continue because despite the threats they enjoy their hobby.

So we send rejection slips and then turn off any replies? We would get as many replies as rejection slips and if we did not reply any further, what would we have across this and other forums "DMOZ editor rejects my site and refuses to comment further, it is not what they said, they are obviously corrupt".

Sorry bogart, we have flashed this up to the techies, but we editors are more than a little frustrated when we ask for help and then we cannot see the application forms. But there is little we as ediors can do, sadly, except complain and that is being done I can assure you. But like all websites they sometimes pass through troubled waters and they are the very devil to fix. They also remind me of cars, great when running a real pig when they get a problem.

Ok, so because you "know" people who have been threatened its ok to have 0 customer service? I think you just like trolling threads to spin folks up for an irrelevant asset that AOL "may" make relevant again one day....its a good distraction at least to read your posts.

And yes, some kind of feedback, even if its vague, hazy, or whatever, is much better than "What the heck is the organization doing, why, when, etc"....

Anyway, I'm going to go figure out the feature Will advertised a while back to hide this post from me so I don't have to listen to you wank anymore...least you could do is make a new gmail with a bogus name since you will not identify yourself.

Cheers,
James

Ok, so after I had a smoke (yes a few of us in the States still do)...I had a thought. With the time, effort, and threats received by editors of DMOZ taken into account, why don't you just turn off submissions altogether?

Make the editors responsible for building their niches in DMOZ (with approval)? You'd cover a lot more of the web that way since many folks don't bother to submit anymore, you wouldn't have to worry about pesky webmasters trying to gain submission to the directory since its not for them, and web users would have a more relevant directory! If I don't like how you manage a sub-niche, I'm welcome to apply as a sub-editor and join the war effort/community.

No more wasted time on spammy sites, processing submissions. Instead you use your talent as a DMOZ editor in picking out the best on the web...not the best submitted...then you have more free time in nuking old, outdated, dead sites too!
Anyway just a thought
James

Is that true that you require a physical address to be accepted into DMOZ?

I had an email from one of the editors saying that I should include an address for one of my clients sites and resubmit, but then i've seen lots of sites without addresses being accepted.

I assume it is down to the individuals editors own judgement?

Anthony

Originally Posted by javanx3d

Ok, so after I had a smoke (yes a few of us in the States still do)...I had a thought. With the time, effort, and threats received by editors of DMOZ taken into account, why don't you just turn off submissions altogether?

Make the editors responsible for building their niches in DMOZ (with approval)? You'd cover a lot more of the web that way since many folks don't bother to submit anymore, you wouldn't have to worry about pesky webmasters trying to gain submission to the directory since its not for them, and web users would have a more relevant directory! If I don't like how you manage a sub-niche, I'm welcome to apply as a sub-editor and join the war effort/community.

No more wasted time on spammy sites, processing submissions. Instead you use your talent as a DMOZ editor in picking out the best on the web...not the best submitted...then you have more free time in nuking old, outdated, dead sites too!
Anyway just a thought
James

I lost that debate, I wanted to turn them off.

Originally Posted by Commandtree1985

Is that true that you require a physical address to be accepted into DMOZ?

I had an email from one of the editors saying that I should include an address for one of my clients sites and resubmit, but then i've seen lots of sites without addresses being accepted.

I assume it is down to the individuals editors own judgement?

Anthony

Depends where you submitted, we expect sites listed in Regional to have an address. But at least you got an email and not just that the editor did not use your site

menj

I've given up listing my sites in DMOZ a long time ago. At one point, I complained in the official DMOZ forum (forgotten the name) about a site of mine that was never listed in DMOZ after 3 years even though it is widely recognised as a quality resource in its niche. An editor there suggested that I resubmit, which I did.

The status quo remained and that was some four years ago. No word about my site's status until today.

We do clearly state that no site is guaranteed a listing. Your site might be sat in a pool with hundreds of spam sites, it is difficult to motivate an editor to spend hours sifting through the junk to find one nugget and editors are free to choose where they work (given any limitations because of the limit of their permissions), when they work, how much they work (given 1 edit every 4 months) and what resource they use when they work a category. Remember we edit as a hobby and because we enjoy editing there is no financial reward and many give up a good deal of their spare time to edit and produce a directory for anyone wanting that resource and not with any benefit in mind that will derive to the site or its owner.