Submissions are moving in

[WebSavvy]

The editors are kicking butt on the submissions now, 205 added so far, and many more to come.

They're all going to be quite busy for the next few days.

:)

[ihelpyou]

Good, let us know when you are all caught up. :)

[swlee]

Added my site yesterday (tried a few times already) so I'm glad things are finally moving forward :)


Good Luck!

[g1smd]

Hmm, you say that 205 are done. How many more are waiting? Hundreds? Thousands?

Perhaps you could provide a Listed : To Do stat say every Sunday evening or something.

The ODP hasn't got reliable stats from the very early days. Keep some records now so that you will have notes of milestone figures and their dates.

[WebSavvy]

For right now something like that would have to be at the back of my list. I have over 100 new categories to create, some new search features to add, code to update, 2 more editor panels to make, 2 new editors to train, and 8,000 sites to get listed.

The editors are processing the sites. Its pointless to list how many to be indexed when nearly 20% of them are spam and will be dumped.

If you want to know the current index size it updates automatically as every new site is entered into the system and the number is located near the bottom of the main page on WebSavvy.

[ihelpyou]

That little update thing is very good. :thumb: 282 right now.

[JoeAnt]

Hey Websavvy,

Just wanted to come over and let you know that I think your directory looks GREAT. From the logo to the ultra-clean layout...keep up the great work.

[WebSavvy]

Thanks a lot! :)

[TiMoGo]

Website looks great and I just checked it out a little. My site is already listed... that is great!

I have a few questions if you don't mind....

1) I looked around and could not find an explanation of your rating system. My site was ranked as a 1. I am assuming that since it was below the two's and three's, it is not as good in your eyes. Let me make this clear, I am NOT asking you to even increase it... but what makes a site rank as a 1 or a 3 or however high you go? (Yes, I was disappointed to see the 1, but not mad, just think there should be some sort of guide to tell you what makes you rank where you are, maybe I could improve something, or is it just because the person rating and ranking the site doesn't find the product appealing?).

2) I did a search for "hearing aid batteries". My site was the only one that came up. I assume this will change as you grow, unfortunately! 8) Nevertheless, your engine showed a "Relevance: 12.72". I guess I also don't understand this. If it is the ONLY site found, and "hearing aid batteries" is even in the description, why would the relevance be so low?

3) Will you please forgive me if I have gotten out of line and not penalize me further or boot me all together? I really just want to learn more about how it works. You can feel free to send me nasty e-mails directly to htigar@buyershaven.com.

Thanks in advance.

Heath

[WebSavvy]

LOL! No one's site is getting the 'boot' so you need not worry about that.

The ratings system is something I just put back in and haven't had the chance to add information on it to the public side, though I will be doing that shortly.

Ratings are decided on based on the overall content of the site, its impact within its category, and the editors view of it.

A one beanie rating is not a 'bad' rating. It just means that it's an 'average' site. Even one of my very own sites has a 1 beanie rating. I don't list my own stuff, another editor will do it and I have no idea which one. This is how we're handling editor listings of their own sites to ensure fairness.

Relevancy varies depending on how many times a keyword shows in the body content, title, and suggested keywords. Also, the number of listings in a particular category affect relevancy.

For example, do a search for "search engine optimization" (with or without quotes) and you'll see 2 sites listed in there right now, both belonging to Doug, and with a relevance level of 9.85 and 4.77, respectively.

I hope that makes it a little clearer for you.

:)

[TiMoGo]

Glad you got my sense of humor there.

Yes, it does make it clearer, but....

I guess I don't know how you rank as "average". I have tweaked my site to be the best in the area (as my competitors who are mad as heck and loosing money by the droves can attest to :D ). What makes my site average? What would make it better?

No, I don't expect you to revamp my site for me or anything, I guess I am just thinking that how does your editor(s) come to the conclusion that it is average?

The field I am in, dealing mostly with the elderly, requires that I not use flash and things like that. If I did, my customers would not stay. They want just plain text, straight to the point content.

OK, I am rambling now, but I guess the question is really:

Do the editors take into account the area or field that the site relates to, or just as a whole for the web?

Because I think it will be AT LEAST a year (maybe two) before I am nipping at the heels of a "great" site like Google or Yahoo ;) and need all the info I can get to beat them.

Thanks for your quick reply to my previous post BTW!

[WebSavvy]

Your site is in the Health category, correct? Sharr is Sr. Editor of Health, and she's also a member here.

Perhaps when she has a bit more spare time after she's had a chance to crawl out from under the pile of submissions we have, she might address your questions a bit more in-depth.

Like I said previously, a one beanie rating is not bad. I have a site that I own, it's very nicely designed, nice layout, but the content is probably a little lacking, although I have added quite a bit to it. It's a site that sells a service also, and one of my editors gave my site a 1 beanie rating too. :)

[srikanthsh]

How could an editor decide whether the content is exceptional or not?

just an example:

Suppose, there is a category for budgeting or some financial software which will contain some consolidation, reporting and analysis kind of things. An editor can decide that the submitted site is related to that category. But he could not say whether the content is exceptional or not. Because, he is not an expert in that concept.

Anyways, it is my opinion.

[srikanthsh]

This rating system would be eating your time (for reviewing the web sites).

[tlpretender]

Are you suggesting quantity over quality?
I prefer quality and I'm sure the editors at Websavvy do also. A little extra time on editing will help make the directory better for the end user. This makes the rating system important.

[WebSavvy]

They decide on the sites the same way other directory systems do within their own rating criteria. For example, GoGuides, and JoeAnt both also use a ratings system.

The editors we have in each category, are experts within their fields. These are seasoned editors who are involved as meta editors, editalls, topic committee editors, and spam committee editors, at DMOZ, GoGuides, and JoeAnt.

The software category is handled by polarmate (Manisha - Admin), I handle the search engine and directory categories, Blue (Admin) & Akanksha handle the Music category, Sharr is Sr. Editor of Health, Liloth is Sr. Editor of Lifestyles, Whipbeat handles Web Hosts Commercial, Rockynate is Sr. Editor of News, Farhan (Admin) handles Search Engine Optimization, Stoner3221 handles Fishing, JohnC handles Apple Computers, Mani handles Cricket, JobSearch, Business & Trade, and Employment, Rbravo handles Travel in Mexico, Numatek handles Web Designers Full Service, and MikeG handles Travel in Greece.

The people we have and in the categories we have them in, are very highly qualified and quite capable to decide whether a site earns merit for a rating of 1-3.

It's not a waste of anyone's time and adds extra value to the quality of the directory.

Our Editors have backgrounds in Journalism, News, Search Engine Optimization, Nursing, Import/Export, Education, Web Design, Graphic Design, Music, Business, and Programming. So, they're pretty high caliber and top notch and I have complete faith in the abilities of each and every one of them.

[TiMoGo]

Deb,

I think I got this subject off in the wrong direction.

I believe that your editors are qualified. I really like your site and find it to be well done, very clean, and easy to navigate. I would think that you used the same amount of care and diligence in choosing your editors and other assistants.

Believe it or not though, you actually answered original question in your last post.

You stated that you have a person that edits your health sites.

This tells me that you are comparing my site to all other health sites. Then yes, I understand the 1 beanie rating. This is kinda what I was looking for. It would be my guess that if you had someone that was overlooking just "hearing healthcare" that I would rate a 2, and if you had someone even further down and rating "hearing healthcare supplies" I may rank a 3.

Of course that is just speculation on my part.

But if my little site is compared to something like WebMD or the like, then yes, give me half a beanie. I am just one guy and can't hire a team of people to do web development, write articles, etc, etc... (Yet)

Ultimately, it is my customers who make that final decision as to whether my site is worthy or not. I realize this.

I do have a small request/suggestion for you though if you don't mind...

When you get more editors in smaller catagories, maybe one of the first things they could do is recheck all the sites in that area and rate them accordingly. It is my humble opinion (and take it for what you paid for it), that as I stated above, if all health sites are going to be rated against sites like WebMD or the like, then there will be few sites with more than a 1 beanie rating. (Just a thought off the cuff here... maybe a larger scale? 1-10?)

Anyway, thank you for your quick responses here. It shows me that you will be very diligent in the pursuits of the directory as well.

[polarmate]

Originally posted by srikanthsh
This rating system would be eating your time (for reviewing the web sites).
srikanthsh, we're looking at editing and adding quality web sites to the WebSavvy directory. Even if the beanie rating did not exist, we would still look closely at each site. We have a panel of editors whose skills cover a very wide spectrum. We have a private forum in which we discuss the web sites to get inputs from other editors.

We have over 8000 submissions that we are processing. If we listed each submission without looking closely at each site, all of them would be listed by now. Besides, after having more than just eyeballed the site, the amount of time that the beanie rating takes is a non-issue. ;)

htigar, just a note to tell you that the beanie rating does not affect the relevance of the search results. As our directory grows, it is the searches that are performed that will drive the traffic to your site than the beanie rating. :) And the search relevance is based on the content of your web site. So if your web site is all content and all text and extremely targeted for your niche audience, your site should do very well in searches.

10 is too large a range and it will also lead to more discussion like: I got a 5 but I really deserve an 8 because ....
We're keeping the beanie rating simple for now.

edited for grammar :rolleyes:

[ihelpyou]

Yes.

The beanie thing seems to me to be something for 'fun'. Nothing more than that. To me, it only reflects 'one' editor's opinion and nothing else. A site could be a 3-beanie to one editor and a 1-beanie to another. It means zero, IMO.

I think goguides has a similar system and we know it's the same thing.

I certainly would not stress over a 1-beanie at all. It's no big deal. As Manisha said, it has zero to do with a search result, and not much to do with anything.

What the directory might do is clearly explain the rating where they talk about what the beanie thing is. I don't know how they describe it, but maybe to clearly define and spell out that it means next to nothing and is one opinion of one editor only.

[maninderwalia]

Hi!
The beanies give an added color/charm to the directory.
Don't they look really sweet
:)
Anyways good points Manisha


Mani

[WebSavvy]

Doug, I do have plans to do just that, as soon as I get some extra time. Right now, other things within the directory are taking priority (like getting sites indexed). :)

[srikanthsh]

-------------------------------------
you need quantity or quality ..?
-------------------------------------

Oh no. I just specified the time thing in a friendly way only (that's why it was posted again). My actual doubt was - what if a site with good content is given low rank..

Anyways, you have a good team. All the best yaar.

[srikanthsh]

Yes. as maninder said, i like the stars beside the listings. Those things add some color to the page.

[WebSavvy]

Anyways, you have a good team. All the best yaar.
Thanks yaar. :)

[srikanthsh]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

srikanthsh, we're looking at editing and adding quality web sites to the WebSavvy directory. Even if the beanie rating did not exist, we would still look closely at each site. We have a panel of editors whose skills cover a very wide spectrum. We have a private forum in which we discuss the web sites to get inputs from other editors.

We have over 8000 submissions that we are processing. If we listed each submission without looking closely at each site, all of them would be listed by now. Besides, after having more than just eyeballed the site, the amount of time that the beanie rating takes is a non-issue.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:D yes. you review each and every web site very carefully.

I was not speaking about reviewing time polarmate. I was speaking about the time to be spent for deciding the rating.

Anyway, let us leave it and all the best. Otherwise doug will come with a stick to beat me - for arguing wastely :whip:

[polarmate]

yes. you review each and every web site very carefully.You are very right. We do. Which is why we have been able to eliminate a lot of spam from the word go.I was not speaking about reviewing time polarmate. I was speaking about the time to be spent for deciding the rating.Then you missed my point altogether. Let me try again ;) : time spent for beanie rating is insignificant when compared to the time spent reviewing a site and deciding whether it is appropriate for inclusion in WebSavvy. That is the key activity we focus on as editors. Not the rating. Not the rating. Not the rating...

[srikanthsh]

Okies. Agreed :3: