Showing posts with label Dmoz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dmoz. Show all posts

Default DMOZ

Default DMOZ. Directories can be quite beneficial for those trying to increase the number of backlinks. If PageRank is important, directory listings can help improve your score. Perhaps the most popular directory is DMOZ, an open directory project that employs human editors for the submission/approval procedure. The use of human editors is founded on furthering the quality of the directory content.

However, human prejudices can factor into the approval process, something that is hard to overcome if you are considering submitting to a competitive category. During the research process, I came across numerous statements about people having to wait months and even years before their site gets accepted into the DMOZ directory.

The following is an example I found on the SitePoint forums offered by Pavel Nedved:

“I know this is largely dependant on who the admin is for your particular category, but approximately how long is the average Submit -> Listing delay? I submitted in early June... should I check back at Christmas?” Pavel’s statement was a humorous look at the wait for DMOZ acceptance. But it begs the question: How long should someone have to wait before they are approved, denied, or contacted about either?

Depending on the amount of submissions a DMOZ category gets, users should expect to hear SOMETHING back from the human editors at some point. Because of the slow response times and rejections for unknown reasons, there has been an increasing amount of vocal displeasure aimed at DMOZ. Some question whether the intentions of a few editors are actually pure.

SitePoint poster Kimberly commented about her experience with DMOZ, “I submitted under a heading only to learn 3 months later that the #3 player in my market was the editor. So I picked another heading… at least I am in now. It is not a fair system.” Judging from Kimberly’s statement, it would appear that she was the victim of another’s ethical shortcomings. If editors allow personal feelings and competitiveness to affect their judgment, obviously they shouldn’t be part of the approval process.

This particular discussion led to one of the more damning posts about DMOZ I’ve read. JakeCop has had some negative experiences with the open directory and lets his frustration out on SitePoint: “Dmoz really is a corrupt system. If the editor in the category has a site in that same category, he'll simply deny any application in the interest of defeating competition… I submitted one of my major sites back in April, and don't expect to ever be listed… I even had one of my sites edited so that it went to a different URL, google bombing my main keyword to a competitor. Dmoz should be burned in the fires it was forged.”

Again, this is a case of personal prejudices and overlapping business interests interfering with a simple approval process; something that doesn’t have to be considered when an automated spider crawls your site. To be fair, every editor that volunteers to DMOZ isn’t going to mistreat your submission, although it may be awhile before it gets approved.

At the Cre8asite forums, Kensplace again gives some really good feedback concerning DMOZ and the approval process. Ken speaks about using DMOZ as a search tool and how the editor’s lack of punctuality and/or the one site - one submission standard can damage the effectiveness of DMOZ: “do you not think you would be even more satisfied if the millions of sites that didn’t make it into dmoz were available for you when you search? Think of all the bargains you are missing, think of all the information, research and technical data that is NOT available on dmoz due to its behavior.”

Granted, not every testimonial I read was negative. A thread on the Digital Point forums spoke of a DMOZ editor assisting a web site owner in the approval process. The poster had waited about 3 months and still no approval, so they decided to email the category editor. After receiving the mailing, the editor “promptly added [the] site to dmoz.” So there is still hope.

The thing I’m left wondering is if all it took was an email to get the approval going, what was going on the 3 months beforehand? Was the editor that busy? Or were they being negligent to their submission queue? Such are the risks when relying on human intervention.

READ MORE - Default DMOZ

What do you think about Dmoz

What do you think about Dmoz . Also known as the Open Directory Project, is widely considered to be the mother of all directories. Well, that was the case at one time, anyway. Dmoz has dropped significantly in popularity over the years, and is the subject of much criticism by webmasters looking for inclusion. What do you think about Dmoz these days? Is it still valuable? Tell us what you think.

WebProNews publisher and iEntry CEO Rich Ord talked to Dmoz founder Rich Skrenta shortly after its 1998 launch. "Dmoz was originally launched as Gnuhoo which it then quickly changed to NewHoo. It was a directory that was for the people and by the people when it came out, so it was considered to be the answer to Yahoo's more closed directory," says Ord.

Now many users are taking issue with that "for the people" part, and the numbers reflect it. Looking at Compete data, Dmoz has declined sharply in unique visitors, visits, and page views over the last six or seven years. According to Compete, Dmoz hasn't had 3 million unique visitors in a month since March 2003, at which point it had over 15 million page views and over 3 and a half million visits. In April of 2009, the numbers read: over a million unique visitors, 10 million page views, and under 2 million visits.

Looking for Respect

Dmoz is looking for a little "R-E-S-P-E-C-T" as a recent post on the Dmoz Blog puts it. Editor glippitt talks about how Dmoz is still a valuable search tool. "Everybody loves Google, everybody loves Wikipedia - so why doesn't everybody love Dmoz? Many people might be quick to tear this question apart, but the post raises some thought-provoking points.

Dmoz isn't about replacing Google or Wikipedia. But this editor claims it has its place alongside them. "There's all sorts of relevant information to be found on the web, and the broader the topic the more useful Dmoz is," says glippitt. "Use it as one of your search vehicles and you may be surprised how much more efficient and productive your searches become. Just don't expect it to be the perfect combination...there's no such thing as a silver bullet in search - not even Google."

But the biggest knock against Dmoz hasn't really been that it's not a potentially great resource. The users who bash it typically claim that Dmoz doesn't give those who submit sites enough respect. "Your site is a black hole. Fix that, and everyone will love Dmoz," says Jim Francis, commenting on the post.

Another knock is that the directory is frequently gamed, and authoritative sites are left out while sites with less than stellar content are there instead. Basically, it's getting abused in Digg-like fashion. But Dmoz still (at least on the surface) says it puts community first.

Grant Belaire "I care about the community and the experience we provide because I think that authoritative, subject matter experts CAN provide an experience on par and in certain circumstances far superior to the algorithmic search," says Grant Belaire, Director - Audience Growth. "And Dmoz is by far the single best example of that on this planet...or any other that I am aware of."

Google and Dmoz

There have been a lot of questions in the past as to just how Google valued Dmoz links (and whether or not they were de-valuing them). Jean Manco, a UK building historian, and a Dmoz editor since 1999 has a very interesting look at the relationship between Google and Dmoz. In the rather lengthy piece (last updated just a few months ago), she says:

In its endless battle against spam, Google needs every weapon it can lay hands on. Recently Google patented a method of including an element of editorial opinion in its algorithm. Dmoz was specifically mentioned.

Yet no one knows better than Google that Dmoz only lists a fraction of the Web. So Google is not about to rely on Dmoz alone for any crucial element of its algorithm. That is a safe bet.

The point is, marketers don't appear to be looking for Dmoz links at the rate they once were. Many will tell you it's quite hard to get one anyway. This could be another contributing factor to the decline in interest for Dmoz. Dmoz has been working on a Dmoz 2.0 for sometime, but staff has not responded to my requests for comments about this.

Do you think Dmoz still has a place in search? Share your thoughts.

READ MORE - What do you think about Dmoz