What I Wish DMOZ Was Like

LOL ! This is great I have submitted many time all different ways and no luck at all… There must be some secret that can get you in?

“Secondly, I wish DMOZ wasn’t so hyped up by everyone and their dog. Yes, DMOZ would be the bees knees and the cat’s meow in anyone’s review of free directories. But as a source of authority and link value, there are hundreds of other free sites that provide the same, or more, authority and link value. Also, Google really shouldn’t use your DMOZ listing title as the title of your site in search results pages. That’s just plain wrong.”

DMOZ has been irrelevant for years now to everyone but DMOZ editors and misinformed webmasters. Seriously, it’s been clear for a long time that there is nothing special about a DMOZ listing for search rankings; and traffic benefits are nonexistant – you’ll be lucky to get 1 or 2 hits a year from DMOZ if you do have a listing there (and that will be from an editor or an editor’s family member). The growth of the web long ago outstripped the ability of DMOZ to keep pace, even if their editors were doing their jobs and were not corrupt.

As for Google (or anyone else) using DMOZ titles, that is easily fixed with the use of the NOODP meta tag, which should be inserted by default in any new web page.

I could not agree more!
I often wonder why the service is even offered if they do nothing with submissions!?
Well said.

I completely agree with you! I submitted our company’s site over a year ago and still haven’t received a response. In fact, I wrote to the editor the category and he said the no longer did stuff with dmoz. Then why is he the editor?!! I tried applying to be the editor, but apparently I need more experience. Experience to sit back and do nothing? It’s frustrating.

How to talk about an overtalked subject without even knowing what you’re talking about

“First of all, I wish DMOZ was a paid listing site.”
Well it’s not. And it’ll never be.

“then they should really either accept more editors, or kick their current editors in the face.”
We wish to accept a lot more of editors. But if people on the internet were not that selfish and thought about others instead of only caring about only their own website, they’d be interested in becoming editors.
And we’d have more candidatures that we’d accept.

“Fourthly, I wish DMOZ would come out with the definitive guide to getting listed in their directory.”
If you spent a bit of time trying to read our guidelines or even our blog, you’d not be saying that. We communicate.
Example : http://blog.dmoz.org/2009/03/09/what-makes-a-good-title-and-description/

Do not expect me to reply to any other comment here or any private message you might want to send me.
Just as you hate dmoz editors I hate marketing people who can’t see anything but their nose and say things sucks because they’re not the way they want them to be.

Like you, I used to be frustrated with DMOZ. I wasn’t sure how the whole process worked on the backend, and after submitting many sites with no luck, decided that I would apply to become an editor to see how it all works. I was accepted (and I still edit a category).

When I first logged into DMOZ, my category was filled with spam submissions. I’m talking in the order of thousands — and I don’t even edit a large category. There were a FEW sites worth adding in my queue, but really not many. In fact, I have added far more sites that I personally read and enjoy to my category than I have added through submissions. It’s a really daunting task to keep up with the queue, but being an editor is a good way to spend an hour or so in the morning a few days a week.

I understand the frustration that submitters have, and acknowledge that making DMOZ a paid service would fix a lot of your concerns, but that’s really against the philosophy of the whole project.

Hi Adam,

I am an SEO and have also been an editor at DMOZ.org since December of 1999. While I cannot speak directly for the Open Directory Project (DMOZ), maybe I can provide an additional perspective.

One of the most frustrating things is the process for existing editors to gain editing rights in additional categories. We have to go through the exact same request process as new-would-be-editors. The Open Directory does this as a quality control measure so that editors are only editing categories that they have real life experience in. This makes since to me as I know nothing about Quantum Mechanics and would make a poor editor for that category. On the other side of this I see little reason why I should not be easily granted editing rights to any and all Eden Prairie, Minnesota categories because this is where I live and I have 10+ years editing experience. I believe that this has been a big hindrance in editor growth and lead to relative slow or non-existent site editing that most webmasters (even me) complain about.

Now to address your points…

First – I agree. A paid option would help in part. Yahoo has been charging $299 per year for half a decade and is still somewhat viable.

Secondly – I personally do not feel that A DMOZ listing is so much more valuable than most other links, especially ones that deliver traffic. I also cannot help but to think that posts like this add to the “Hype”.

Thirdly – I believe that this is related to my comments above on the request process for existing editors. Also, as Jessie Warner stated, many editors have moved on, no longer edit for DMOZ and have not been replaced.

Fourthly – There is no need. The current guidelines of DMOZ are fine. Your submissions are either:
A. Keyword Stuffed and not an official/legitimate company Title & Description. ~ since you are an SEO, I would guess this is not the case.
B. Were submitted to categories that editors no longer take a active role in editing. ~ this is very common and happens to my submissions as well!

Fifthly – I think I know where you are going with the “SEO, Jobs, Careers, Linkbuilding” post. I don’t want to give it away, but if its about what I think its going to be about then it is going to be very insightful for most readers.

In summary – I also follow the same DMOZ submission practice as you… “And I will continue to submit my clients’ sites to DMOZ because hey, why not?”.

Cheers!

James Svoboda said, “B. Were submitted to categories that editors no longer take a active role in editing. ~ this is very common and happens to my submissions as well!”

Every time the issue of “no active editor” has been raised, various DMOZ editors and metas have denied that this is an issue, purportedly because even where there is no editor listed for a category editors of categories above that one can edit all c ategories below.

The multiple contradictions between what one editor says and what another says is just one of the reasons that most of us who have been around for a while view any statement by a DMOZ editor as questionable. Indeed, one is led to wonder if there is any clear policy at all at DMOZ. If there is one at all, it would seem that it is not clearly conveyed to its own editors.

Kevin said, “When I first logged into DMOZ, my category was filled with spam submissions. I’m talking in the order of thousands — and I don’t even edit a large category. There were a FEW sites worth adding in my queue, but really not many. In fact, I have added far more sites that I personally read and enjoy to my category than I have added through submissions. It’s a really daunting task to keep up with the queue, but being an editor is a good way to spend an hour or so in the morning a few days a week.”

Then why pretend to take submissions at all? Why not just state publicly that editors will go out and find sites on their own, since that seems to be the norm?

Damien: Foolish is the man who took offense, when no offense was intended.
Even more foolish is the man who took offense, when offense was intended.

Kevin: I wrote this post in hopes a few people from DMOZ would possibly consider some of my points. I understand the desire to have a truly altruistic site and stay true to your core values. So I respect that.

James: Thanks! Sure you don’t want to give a shot at $25?

And finally Damien chimes in with the insulting arrogance that has become a DMOZ trademark to make a series of disingenuous statements, and then ends with “Just as you hate dmoz editors I hate marketing people who can’t see anything but their nose and say things sucks because they’re not the way they want them to be”.

Very nice. And you wonder why people hate DMOZ, Damien?

“Every time the issue of “no active editor” has been raised, various DMOZ editors and metas have denied that this is an issue, purportedly because even where there is no editor listed for a category editors of categories above that one can edit all categories below.”

minstrel: You are correct about Metas and editors of higher up categories having the ability to edit all below. The situation is that there are just too few of active editors of any level, and too many unedited categories and submissions for the higher up editors to get to them all. This is where it would be great if they loosened up their new category approval process.

Also, can you blame Damien for his response? He is most likely volunteering and editing in his spare time. Consider how would you feel if you kept reading a bunch of spiteful comments and posts from all over the web about something you are doing for free? The DMOZ Snark has created a vicious circle that seems to have no end.

Adam: I don’t want to spoil it for everyone… also, if I am wrong about your topic, I am going to save what I have in mind and write a post of my own;-)

James Svoboda writes, “Also, can you blame Damien for his response?”.

Yes, I can and do. That sort of poison permeates the DMOZ forum and posts by DMOZ editors on many webmaster forums. It has sadly become characteristic of many DMOZ editors and it does nothing at all to endear DMOZ to webmasters or potential editors, or to enhance the general reputation of DMOZ.

There are volunteers all over the net. Please don’t expect anyone to feel sorry for Damien or any other DMOZ editor. Ever hear of the Golden Rule? If you want to be treated with respect, treat others respectfully.

@Minstrel,
We don’t *pretend* to take submissions — I only speak for myself here, but the majority of submissions to my category are a) spam sites b) sites that add nothing to the category c) sites submitted in the totally wrong category or d) “business card” sites that add little value to the category as a whole.

There are occasional links that add value to the category that are submitted correctly (I have added many), and I always add those.

However, you have to understand the mentality of an editor. Our objective is to make our category the best that it can possibly be — not necessarily the most inclusive. Sometimes, less is more.

@minstrel and dmoz editors should change and be more “comprehensive” while seo people shouldn’t ?
As James said it’s a vicious circle where nobody wants to do the first step. And I won’t be the one to do it, sorry.

Particularly when we *are* doing efforts. Two years ago, we were not communicating at all.
Now we have an official blog with regular updates for example.

But that doesn’t changes anything because anyway no seo people seems to read it. You’re stuck in the “My website isn’t listed. So I hate it”.

Kevin wrote, “We don’t *pretend* to take submissions — I only speak for myself here, but the majority of submissions to my category are a) spam sites b) sites that add nothing to the category c) sites submitted in the totally wrong category or d) “business card” sites that add little value to the category as a whole. ”

Yes, you only speak for yourself and my guess is you don’t edit a major category. This is far from my first debate about DMOZ policies. I think you’ll find that many editors all but ignore the so-called “submission queue”. Even those who don’t complain about it. To my mind, it makes no sense to continue to invite submissions if those submissions are going to remain in the queue for months or years.

Kevin also wrote, “However, you have to understand the mentality of an editor. Our objective is to make our category the best that it can possibly be — not necessarily the most inclusive. Sometimes, less is more.”

You are an editor at DMOZ. DMOZ is one directory out of hundreds or thousands, and there are probably a dozen or so major directories with editors. Don’t assume that because you are at DMOZ no one but another DMOZ editor can understand the mentality of an editor. But most of those other major directories function far more efficently than DMOZ, a fact that DMOZ editors and administrators generally try to ignore.

Damien wrote, “@minstrel and dmoz editors should change and be more “comprehensive” while seo people shouldn’t? As James said it’s a vicious circle where nobody wants to do the first step. And I won’t be the one to do it, sorry.”

What is this in response to? And why are you so focused on the us vs. them mentality?

Damien also wrote, “Particularly when we *are* doing efforts. Two years ago, we were not communicating at all. Now we have an official blog with regular updates for example.”

Uh-huh. I’ve read it. It has no substance. It’s just editors patting themselves on the back for a good job. And your use of the term regular updates is laughable.

The Damien wrote, “But that doesn’t changes anything because anyway no seo people seems to read it. You’re stuck in the “My website isn’t listed. So I hate it”.”

No. I rarely read it because it has no content worth reading. And I am listed, by the way. I hate DMOZ because it’s an inefficient dinosaur of a bureaucracy that exists as an old boys club and to promote its own editors, and because too many of its editors, metas, and admins are have and promote the same adversarial and insulting relationship that you espouse with anyone outside DMOZ.

How many people do you know who use DMOZ as a search source? Personally I’ve never used it.

Guess what the following terms all have in common SEO, Jobs, Careers, Linkbuilding: They are all about making connections. Connecting sites and users. Connecting emplyees to one another. Services and products to consumers, and quality content to consumers of that content.

I totally and mentally agreed with minstrel. Bytheway thanks for the NOODP meta tag info. We don’t need DMOZ. Three options for DMOZ sickness:
1- Make DMOZ paid directory like Yahoo Dir. So people can get a great customer service.
2- DMOZ should be closed.

@James Green: That’s a really good guess, but totally wrong

DMOZ works like a black box and NO ONE knows what’s happening to your requests. They leave everyone in the dark. It does not matter if you follow the guidelines, you are still subject to the will of an editor who thinks differently from another and don’t follow any type of guidelines.
I wonder why Google still trust this directory. The future of DMOZ depends on their will to become a normal directory. I think it will disappear.