Every editor knows the systemn has flaws. But what you (and other complaining webmasters) see as flaws are not the flaws we know of.pbarker3 said:Can any editor admit that the system has flaws?
We are constantly looking for ways to do things better. But this won't change DMOZ to the thing complaining webmasters want it to become.pbarker3 said:Can you turn the light of truth on yourselves and look for ways to do better?
I don't understand that. If it is irrelevant to you why use it?I do, however, use the directory.
This one comes up regularly. What right do you or anyone else have to tell me or my fellow editors how we should spend our unpaid spare time? I could do more editing if I gave up watching my godson play football on Saturday and Sunday mornings. It is my time, I will do with it what I want, and suggesting you know better than me how I should be spending it is the height of presumptuous arrogance.How much time and energy could the editors save and put to better use than lurking in forums
You don't have a right or any other basis for disagreeing as you are not part of the project, nor do you appear to comprehend its purpose. We don't worry about it because the reality is that every site that has not been listed - all bar 5 million and counting - is part of the backlog. And since that would take, by all accounts, 300 years minimum what is the point of worrying about it. So we operate by selectively identifying and listing sites that come to our attention by a variety of means including sometimes looking at pools of public suggestions. By doing so we build up a catalog of sites representing the best and most comprehensive resources on any given subject. We don't aim to capture every site because on many subjects the new sites don't actually add new information to that we have already linked to. In many areas we have actually exhausted the supply of new information - very few hotel booking services offer anything innovative these days; how many discount perfume online stores do you need.I disagree that the backlog is not something you should worry about.
This is an excellent comparisonThe librarian is not at all accountable to the author as to whether they even bought their book to include within the library. With millions of titles the library is free to include those that IT wants to, modified by requests from the people that BORROW books. They are free to NOT be influenced by those that SELL the books - and the ODP is free to chosse which sites IT lists, NOT modified by what WEBMASTERS want to be listed.