DMOZ is Dead...Long Live the Open Directory Movement!
#1
Posted 27 October 2006 - 10:33 AM
I think this will be remembered as the week that DMOZ died.
Even if the servers ever come back on line (which no one from DMOZ has been willing to predict), I think that what remaining credibility the directory had left is now gone.
The open directory model is, however, too valuable to the Internet community to be lost, or more specifically, to allow it to be discredited by the fall of DMOZ. I think the critical error with DMOZ was the exclusivity inherent in its editorial process. Anyone reading these threads has to be appalled by the colossal arrogance of the moderators and senior editors.
Have a problem? It must be, according to them, that the failing is yours, not theirs. Has DMOZ erred? Impossible, according to them, DMOZ policy is such and such, and it is inconceivable that the individuals who administer those policies are anything but infallible.
Perhaps the time has come to try to marry the wiki approach championed by Wikipedia, with the structure of an online directory. It would, I realise, have to be organised in a way that is more resistant to abuse (since a web directory would tempt more abuse than an enclopedia), but I do not believe that this is beyond the skills of dedicated people. At the very least, it would have to be an improvement over the tyranny of the DMOZ editor-priesthood.
I'm sad to see DMOZ go the way of its dinosaur-like mascot, but, like the dinosaur, it has had its day, and it has died because of its inherent inability to adapt.
I am going to write to the Wikipedia Foundation, and encourage them to create a new online directory to pick-up where DMOZ left off. I hope anyone reading this forum will join me in doing so.
#2
Posted 27 October 2006 - 11:06 AM
June Bugeye said:
Why ask someone else. You seem to know how everything should work. Act your self. Spilling words is easy. Live to what you say.
#3
Posted 27 October 2006 - 11:12 AM
Quote
Quote
Quote
regards
:o I reserve the right to be human and make mistakes. :o
:mad: Private messages asking for submission status or preferential treatment will be ignored. :mad:
#4
Posted 27 October 2006 - 11:16 AM
#5
Posted 27 October 2006 - 11:22 AM
If the ODP actually died every time someone on a forum decided that it was dying, it would have been gone years ago.
Please do not contact me directly to ask me the status of your listing, because I will most likely ignore your message.
Read the "[thread=39116]Discontinuation of site status checks[/thread]" thread.
#6
Posted 27 October 2006 - 07:15 PM
#7
Posted 28 October 2006 - 03:04 AM
#8
Posted 28 October 2006 - 03:34 AM
croatiankid said:
If you try doing the same again, you will see a message teeling you what is going on:cool:
#9
Posted 28 October 2006 - 06:34 AM
#10
Posted 08 November 2006 - 01:40 PM
June Bugeye said:
I am going to write to the Wikipedia Foundation, and encourage them to create a new online directory to pick-up where DMOZ left off. I hope anyone reading this forum will join me in doing so.
Well their you have it another satisfied customer! :rolleyes:
thx
malcolm
#11
Posted 08 November 2006 - 01:44 PM
#12
Posted 08 November 2006 - 01:50 PM
#13
Posted 08 November 2006 - 01:54 PM
DMOZ is only "useless" for webmasters wanting to promote their site, and that is intentionaly.
#14
Posted 08 November 2006 - 01:55 PM
Yes, the editing side has been down for a bit, but the public facing view which provides the data to our users is still very much alive.
#15
Posted 08 November 2006 - 02:29 PM
Don't agonize over google and ODP data... ;)
But if you believe that ODP data is useless why the hell do you try to suggest your own website to DMOZ?
English : FAQ *** Editorial Guidelines
Deutsch: FAQ *** Editier-Richtlinien *** ODP Weblog
#16
Posted 09 November 2006 - 11:40 AM
liszt said:
Don't agonize over google and ODP data... ;)
But if you believe that ODP data is useless why the hell do you try to suggest your own website to DMOZ?
#17
Posted 10 November 2006 - 09:23 AM
#18
Posted 10 November 2006 - 12:00 PM
Quote
Wow, are you metas really like that? I must have missed something over the last five years of editing, because you've always treated me fairly and respectfully as a fellow editor, :) .
And, you didn't become meta editors by sitting on your hands, but by being honest, trustworthy, and working ten times harder than anyone else.
Me thinks fair maiden knows not of what she speaks, ;) .
#19
Posted 10 November 2006 - 04:08 PM
It would be a shame if all this valuable information would get lost! Good luck in restoring it to whoever this will be.
Janneke Nijenhuis
The Netherlands
#20
Posted 10 November 2006 - 04:28 PM

Help















