[ihelpyou]

Just one question:

How does a brand new directory with very few listings get listed in 8 days, and other directories and sites take over one year?

I'm not happy about this. ... missing categories... few listings.... NO different than the hundred other new directories that have sprang up in the past few months.

Would anyone care to elaborate?

http://dmoz.org/Comp...ng/Directories/

Many of you know I have been a huge fan of the ODP over the years, and I have stood with them when members in my forums have bashed them. This incident has truly made me mad. I never thought something like this could happen.

Thank you.

Doug Heil

[ishtar]

That site blows. See also - http://www.rubberstamped.org/blog.html

I counted every listing I could find and came up with 220. This isn't a directory by my book.

[inbetweener]

Ishtar, Doug has a personal vendetta against me, and I suspect this may be the reason he is raising this issue with you.

The thing is Rich personally approved the submission. I didn't request this of him.

Secondly, the directory is purposefully small. If you read the About page you will note that this directory hunts out and lists authorities. It doesn't aim to list every site, or even come close. Size is a poor measure of quality in this respect.

If DMOZ responds to personal vendetta's, then that presents problems, does it not?

[old_crone]

How can anyone measure quality without content or so little content that the quality can't be determined?

[ishtar]

I could care less what your relationship to the previous poster is. I don't think there is ANY way that your site should have been listed. And if anyone else would have listed it, I would already have reported it as abuse. As it happens, I haven't reported anything. Yet. I also haven't deleted it. Yet. Just because Rich started ODP does not give him the privilege to add crap to the directory,

[Quadrille]

inbetweener said:

Ishtar, Doug has a personal vendetta against me, and I suspect this may be the reason he is raising this issue with you.

If accepting totally inappropriate sites - while declining directories many times larger - is your standard of editing, then "personal vendetta" is libel.

The term you want is "legitimate complaint"

Please try to keep personalities (Doug, Rich...) out of this. Lets discuss the editing of The Open Directory, against guidelines.

[inbetweener]

Quote

I don't think there is ANY way that your site should have been listed

My site did meet the guidlines outlined, hence the reason I submitted. The editor made his decision that the addition was worthwhile. It's fair to say not all editors will agree with other editors choices, yes?

I respect decisions made, it's your directory. However, you should keep in mind that you risk being played by the hardline SEO who started this thread.

Is that what DMOZ wants? Where will it end?

[Connie]

Quote

If DMOZ responds to personal vendetta's, then that presents problems, does it not?

IMO the only vendetta if there is one is the quality of the directory.

[motsa]

Quote

Secondly, the directory is purposefully small. If you read the About page you will note that this directory hunts out and lists authorities.

I sincerely doubt your commitment to that when I see some of the shops you've listed in Health or real estate agents listed under Business. Be honest about what you're doing -- you might be listing some authority sites but you're also listing people who will pay your listing fee. That's no way to build a truly relevent directory. I applaud the goal but I don't think you have a hope in heck of achieving it.

[ihelpyou]

This is absolutely nothing personal with "inbetween" at all.

My concern stems from the very fact I have backed the DMOZ at every turn over the years. I have the proof of that with "many" discussion forum posts that are very public. If some founder that sells a website like DMOZ to others, and then proceeds to turn it into this 'back scratching" kind of scheme, that's when a problem will then exist. The ODP guidelines are "very" clear with directories inbetween. It doesn't take rocket science to see that your directory has very little "real" listings. Afterall; it was launched "one" month ago.

I've never said you should "never" be listed, but have said you could be listed later if it qualifies. To list your directory at the expense of other directories I am very aware of does not make the ODP look very good in this situation. There is more than a couple out there that were turned down because of "lack of listings", or "empty categories". Your directory has both.

So please, get off this "personal" stuff. I could care less about you. I "DO" care about the DMOZ and always, always have.

oh, and BTW inbetween; I find it ironic that you told "MY" forum members in public on a few occasions that you launched this directory because you have had many problems and beefs with the ODP. You have posted in other fora as well the same exact thing. You even wrote in your blog the same thing. You also gave that very reason on the about us page of your directory. To now say the ODP is great in my forums is certainly a hoot. First; it makes you look desperate. Second: It makes me look silly as well since your listing goes against all of my own posts that back up the odp at every turn.

[just_browsing]

Seems to me that the real question is whether editor abuse has taken place.

Bluntly, was this site added to DMOZ in order that the editor should gain an "advantage". That advantage being a interview with the site in question for PR purposes. If so it is an editor abusing their position, same as if they accepted, say, money.

Have other sites been similarly added by the same editor?

(and I do not know if my eyes have deceived me, but it looked as if the site in question was removed then added back in the last 12 hours)

[Quadrille]

just_browsing said:

Seems to me that the real question is whether editor abuse has taken place.

Exactly; ODP's biggest problem is accusations of editor abuse and the only defence (regularly repeated by me and others), is "Report it and it will be dealt with".

If this matter is not resolved according to ODP's own guidelines, what are we to say when forums are filled with spammers making anti-ODP speeches?

The involvement of Mr Skrenta raises the stakes; perhaps he would care to comment on why this one directory has been treated so differently from many more mature sites. Perhaps he made a simple error; in which case, the sooner he accepts that, the better.

Failing all that, surely the meta editors should take appropriate action?

[ishtar]

Last night I went through every site listed in this directory and I found 19 sites that were not listed in dmoz and possibly should be. The others were either listed or were total crap. As soon as I find the correct categories to list these sites in, there will be no point in listing the directory. And it will be deleted. This will probably happen sometime today, but no guarantees.

[SeoBook]

ishtar said:

Last night I went through every site listed in this directory and I found 19 sites that were not listed in dmoz and possibly should be. The others were either listed or were total crap. As soon as I find the correct categories to list these sites in, there will be no point in listing the directory. And it will be deleted. This will probably happen sometime today, but no guarantees.

is that to say that there should not be new competing sites in any field just because when they were started there efforts might be a bit easy to duplicate?

I bet you could state similar stats about many directories listed in that same category.

also what happens when he adds another few thousand unique domains?

another point... there are categories for those sites who ONLY use DMOZ data. because you or a group of friends can reproduce a collection of work does it actually mean that it has lowered value? if that is so then why even list sites with outdated copies of the current DMOZ index?

[qwerty]

Quote

also what happens when he adds another few thousand unique domains?

I think that would be a good time to resubmit. If at that point the editors view RS as a unique, valuable resource, I would hope they'd list it and not let this thread color their opinion in any way.

(He said as he waited patiently for his own highly-targeted niche directory to be listed...)

[bldarter]

I doubt the listing of the site has the support of any meta or administrator at ODP. Not enough content to list yet.

[nea]

I second that, bldarter.

[inbetweener]

A shame, however thanks for your timely consideration :)

[just_browsing]

Forgive me if I misunderstand what editor abuse is, but

http://inelegant.org/ddp/03003/ states

"Additionally, we discourage submitters from soliciting or bribing editors in exchange for listings in the directory. Editors found to be accepting or soliciting bribes in exchange for listing sites or unfairly promoting these sites over others will be removed from the directory"

Do I assume that the editor involved will be removed under this rule ?

[inbetweener]

Quote

Additionally, we discourage submitters from soliciting or bribing editors in exchange for listings in the directory. Editors found to be accepting or soliciting bribes in exchange for listing sites

Because that did not happen. I didn't ask Rich to look into my listing request. He did it himself, then contacted me afterwards.

Rich has a fine sense of humour. It's a shame that aspect doesn't appear to have been appreciated.