ODP Information

[nicksahadi]

After reading many posts here that involved misinformation such as "If you have a problem, don't give up; DMOZ has someting like 44,000 editors all of them volunteers and all of them are different in their attitudes and abilities. "
http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/t1522/s46f8fa7961ec59258a8e6bdef2541d9a.html

As
reported here (http://pub14.ezboard.com/ftraffickcommunitytheotherdirectoryproject.showMessageRange?topicID=192.topic&start=41&stop=44) by ODP meta editor flame (http://dmoz.org/profiles/flame.html) aka Joe Sullivan aka FreeBeer, the ODP only has about 5 to 10 thousand editors.

You can guess at why this is not pointed out every time. The numbers on the front page of the ODP reflect every netcitizen who has ever been accepted into the project including a majority of which have not been active within the last three months. There is an older list of inactives that can be found at
http://kleer-fax.com/lnc/alleds/ note that the inactives are included in the count on the front page of the ODP. Again, that number includes former editors all the way back to 1998, some of which have not been a part of the project for over two years. Those numbers on the front page also include editors who were kicked out of the project. Why other hi ranking editors in the know don't point this out in repsones to posts such as the one referenced above will become more evident as you read on.

Another common inquirey is why does it take so long to get listed or better yet "I have submitted my site, but it's still not listed and no one replies to my emails". This page (http://www24.brinkster.com/wndp/dmozunreviewed.htm) will shed light and help to answer this question.

Many more answers to these types of questions can be found at
The Other Directory Project (http://pub14.ezboard.com/ftraffickcommunitytheotherdirectoryproject)
and
XODP (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xodp/)

Articles of interest include:
AOL Meddling in ODP Causes Shift in Balance of Editorial Power By Julian McCreary (http://www.traffick.com/story/portals/200108_aolodp.asp)
and
Why the Open Directory isn't Open (http://www.traffick.com/story/searchengines/000305_opendirectory.asp?StoryID=59)

Best Regards,
Nick Sahadi

[markymark]

Thanks for information, Nick. Very enlightening.

[ihelpyou]

ODP is doing the best they can do as they are made up primarily of 'volunteer' editors.

I have never been an editor but it is common knowledge that it can take awhile before a site is listed or before a change might be made to a request. Not necessarily the fault of anyone, just simply a fact of life. It is a free listing.

I do fail to see how or why the links above are of any help. You do have the right to post them as I do allow links, which is quite different from many forums.

Just want to make sure that no one believes I agree with the poster about everything or agree with views expressed at other forums.

Welcome Nick! :hi: Simply be careful when posting about ODP.

[newriver]

Welcome Nick,
If you are going to join the forums simply to point a link to another forums, I feel that is in bad taste. I was ready to edit the links out, but Doug has already said he is allowing them.

I still feel that is in bad taste.

[nicksahadi]

Thank you for the welcome. :hi:

I have been a member for quite some time and have enjoyed reading various discussions that these forums provide.

My hat goes off to ihelpyou for providing a forum "which is quite different from many forums". Indeed it provides a much needed resource and should be a major destination for those in the industry and anyone interested in SEs.

Best Regards,
Nick Sahadi

[ihelpyou]

I appreciate the nice comments Nick!

I am happy to hear you enjoy reading here. Many simply view the forums without posting but I am glad you decided to join us.

I do allow opinions to be heard and I have had my own problems with getting sites into the ODP, but whenever those problems come up I simply say to myself "it is a free listing" and then I feel better about things. :)

[Mel]

Hi Nick - sorry I can't give you such a nice welcome, but as the poster of the quote you chose to trash, I would like to respond:

After carefully reading all the ODP bashing links you pointed to I fail to see that any of them contradict my quote which you have posted, I.E. there are listed by ODP 44,000 editors, you can contradict it or qualify it but you can't say that because all of them are not as active as others they should not be counted, NOR did I say that these were all active editors.

You yourself have made the point that there are great differences in the abilities and attitudes of the editors, and some of the posts you pointed us to said the same thing, perservere and you will get listed.

IMO if you have so many problems with ODP, and if you are qualified, why don't you join as an editor and help reduce that staggering back load? After all there are only something like 265 thousand applications pending, so if you joined and edited only ten sites per day, you could reduce that backlog by 2% in only a year!

Contribution instead of complaining usually gets better results.

[Farhan]

Originally posted by Mel
Contribution instead of complaining usually gets better results.

Well said Mel!
There is no point in criticizing a directory, which is managed by volunteer editors. And like Google they don’t owe you anything :)

[WebSavvy]

Very well said Mel. :thumb:


nicksahadi

DMOZ, like any search engine is not perfect. But as webmasters we need them as much as they need us. It is a two-way street. One cannot exist without the other.

DMOZ is different from the other SE's in the respect that it allows user contribution to help build the database.

You are dealing with real live human beings. They are "volunteers." They do not receive any compensation for their time, effort, or contribution. What they get out of it is personal satisfaction.

They have lives outside of ODP just like we do. Cut them some slack. They are doing the best that they can.

[Advisor]

The irony, of course, is that DMOZ (or NewHoo as it was first named) was created because of the frustration with NOT being able to get listed in Yahoo in a timely manner. Now we can get into Yahoo in a week (for a fee of course), but can languish in the DMOZ review process forever. I wonder when they will be instituting a fee? Since Netscape/AOL has owned them for so long, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already.

Jill

[newriver]

Can't charge a fee legally under the current system. If they charged a fee they would have to pay the volunteer editors.

[nicksahadi]

Hello to Mel, Farhan, savvy1, and webwhiz :hi:

My reference to the numbers in Mel's post were just that. A reference to numbers, not Mel. I should have clarified this in the post and for not doing so I apologize to Mel. :cheers:

The purpose was to clarify what exactly the numbers on ODPs front page represent. As a former editor from way back when, I have requested that I not be counted in those numbers anymore to no avail.


The irony, of course, is that DMOZ (or NewHoo as it was first named) was created because of the frustration with NOT being able to get listed in Yahoo in a timely manner.

Correct, that was a large part of GnuHoo's (then NewHoo and finally ODP/ DMOZ) foundation.

Now we can get into Yahoo in a week (for a fee of course), but can languish in the DMOZ review process forever.

As is such many submitters do not no why and my intent was to provide an answer. Indeed it helps to know where you stand as a submitter.

Best Regards,
Nick Sahadi

[Yezariael]

I read all those articles on the top with great interest.

I can only speak for the german part of dmoz and what I see there its almost the other way round..

People are very keen to help and very busy as well.
Great restructurations consume time and effort as well as helping newbie getting on the track.
After metas had some more time there were like 30 new editors each weak. If someones shows interest and skill new categories are thrown at him :)

(bad)SEO is a problem because like 40% of all unreviewds are dupes or already listed. Another 20% are plain spam. (doorways etc.)

What really is a problem is that everyone focuses on cats with high count of unreviewds while single important cats with little unreviewds can stay unedited for over a year.

But thats part of the nature if you are trying to fight a bush fire with buckets !?

[newriver]

Hello Yezariael,

welcome to the forums, glad to have a German DMOZ editor here. Well said!

[nicksahadi]

Hello to Yezariael :hi:

But thats part of the nature if you are trying to fight a bush fire with buckets !?

As the "bush fire" you speak of represents hundreds of thousands of unreviewed sites it makes no sense to add more bush land.

MusicMoz (http://www.musicmoz.org/)

ChefMoz (http://www.chefmoz.org)

This sheds more light on AOL owned ODP priorities. While certain editors, (who I applaud ) try to put out the eternal "bush fire", others including certain hi rankers leave while the fire is burning to build more ODP projects.

Best Regards,
Nick Sahadi