Will Dmoz Continue to Have a Place in Search?

Google on Dmoz, Dmoz on Future Change

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:

[ Search]

Nearly a year ago, we looked at what Dmoz (aka: The Open Directory Project) was up to, and if it still had a place in search. The directory was talking about how it was looking for "a little respect" as it prepared to celebrate its 11th birthday (on June 5).

Has Dmoz earned any more of that respect going into its 12th year?
Tell us what you think.

Dmoz has been brought back into the discussion as Google’s Matt Cutts appeared in a new Google Webmaster Help Video answering the following user question:

Why is Google still taking notice of DMOZ? Many have alleged that the editors are corrupt. It’s impossible to get them to list a site even if it is very relevant to a specific area.

"I know that people do have complaints about Dmoz, and we don’t show it in our one-Google-sort of tabs at the top of the page like we used to in previous years, but in some countries, it can be very hard to type in queries. It can take a lot of time," says Cutts. "For example in something like Chinese or Japanese or Korean, sometimes it might be easier to browse by clicking, rather than typing in the query, and so especially in those sorts of countries, it can be very helpful to show Dmoz."

"But we don’t use Dmoz in a lot of the ways that we used to. We don’t show the Dmoz categories or the Open Directory categories beneath the snippet, and we used to do that," he adds. "We don’t show it on the main page like we used to anymore. So if you’re frustrated, you can always try a different category that you also think is relevant. You can always go to editors up the chain. But in general, if you can’t get into Dmoz, I wouldn’t necessarily worry about it. There are a lot of other great places to get links across the web."

Dmoz continues down the slope it’s been on for quite some time in terms of unique visitors. Google not giving it as much play certainly must play at least some role in this. It does get over 18% of its referrals from Google:

Dmoz on its Own Future

Dmoz swears it still has plenty of life left in it, so if you believe the editorial department, there may be new opportunities from Dmoz down the road. In a post earlier this year, reflecting upon the last decade, Bob Keating, Dmoz editor-in-chief said, "Over the ’00 decade, DMOZ has grown to be one of the most successful collaborative projects on the web. It has outlasted its commercial counterparts, and continues to be relevant in the search industry. The keys to its longevity and usefulness are its dedicated community, its open, collaborative editorial model, its non-commercial nature, and open data distribution channel."

"While DMOZ receives hundreds of editor applications, and lists thousands of websites each week, it needs a new Plan – a new blueprint for the future of how the web is organized, and how human organized data is consumed," he says. "Using traditional web directories as a means for information discovery is a thing of the past. However, the need for organized web-based content continues to grow exponentially. The future of DMOZ does not lie merely in improving its toolset, making it more SEO friendly, or convincing others of its collective brilliance. Its future lies in turning the entire thing on its head."

Keating went on to list some goals for this decade, including the development of an API for Dmoz data to allow editors and developers to write new apps using it. He also wants to transform Dmoz from a fixed-path directory to "the largest faceted system for organizing information on the web," have it become a "major influencer" for bringing the semantic web out of the lab/enterprise and into the entire web, and transforming Dmoz into a "suite of products with multiple levels of participation and engagement."

Things have been pretty quiet on the Dmoz front since then. The only updates on the Dmoz blog have been from editors talking about their experiences editing specific categories. Perhaps that is because some of the aforementioned goals are in the process of being realized behind the scenes.

Note: With a great deal of talk in the comments about corrruption, you may be interested in hearing from a former editor on the topic. Read here.

Do you think Dmoz has a place in the future of the web? In the future of search? What kinds of apps would you like to see built upon a Dmoz API? Share your thoughts in the comments.


Will Dmoz Continue to Have a Place in Search?
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://www.promotionismybusiness.com Blurt Inc.

    Do I think that Dmoz as a has a place in the future of the Web? No. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to see the entire site sold in the next few years because, well, like you said, it hasn’t made any updates in the past year except for some rather irrelevant personal comments by a few of its editors.

  • Guest

    DMOZ is a friggin’ sham and a big worthless list of nothing. Why Google continues to view its entries as super-duper relevant is beyond me.

    I have submitted our site for inclusion two or three times in the last two years or so (careful to heed their warnings about submitting multiple times in a certain time frame) and have not seen any changes. We are just as relevant as our competitors who ARE included in the directory, yet they seem to not give a flying funk about including us. I have to wonder if someone is greasing palms to get their sites listed, or if the editors for our category are just a bunch of lazy bastards. Possibly both.

    What really sickens me is that SEO writers and so-called “experts” continue to implant their heads further up DMOZ’s ass every time they write a basic how-to on linking strategies. Get with the times, people. Whatever relevance that directory had has been shot for some time. Stop treating it like it’s the Jerusalem of the Web. That goes for the Google folks, too.

  • Daniel

    Forget about the fact that only one of the 15 or so sites I manage is actually listed (all are very relevant pr 3-6 and 5-12 years old). I have actually personally heard from someone who has bribed the editors multiple times to get listed with great-quick results. What a worthless sham

  • Shay

    DMOZ is simply not relevant anymore. I can see the unique visitors in this article but does anyone even “use” it. Those visitors you see are SEO “experts” trying to get their site on there.

  • http://referencement-qualitatif.blogspot.com/ SEO

    For such a huge volume of well-organised information, DMOZ has no counter-parts. Even if it takes ages to get listed in the directory, even if SOME editors abuse the guidelines and the meta editors, DMOZ still is *one* of the more reliable ways to search and find on the web. Period.

    • http://www.ecommercestorehelper.com James Dorans

      DMOZ is as ancients as dial up modem with even being more useless then used toilet paper.

  • Guest

    I hope DMOZ2.0 will be better.

  • Guest

    As some one has said DMOZ2 is getting close, also referred to in DMOZ blogs, but not in the above article so how can one of your repliees on here say there has been no updates? Also if DMOZ is a “friggin’ sham”, as another reply says, why is s/he breaking their neck to get their site listed and complaining and bleating when it is not listed? If it had been listed you can bet your bottom dollar that if asked about DMOZ it would have been the best thing since sliced bread.

    You can pretty much bet that the vitriolic replies are from web owners who have not been listed or editors who have, sadly, been booted for abusive editing.

    In all this remember DMOZ editors are volunteers working in their spare time. They volunteer to work at what they enjoy doing, it is their hobby and DMOZ nor it’s editors have any say in who uses DMOZ material, including Google, because it is given away free to anyone and everyone provided they give the correct attribution in accordance with the usage licence. Also remember that anyone can apply to share in spending their spare time cataloguing content rich sites, there is a button on almost every category inviting applications.

    Yes I am biased, I am a volunteer editor, but do not represent AOL, DMOZ staff , the directory or anyone else.

    • Chris Crum

      I did mention Dmoz 2.0 in a previous article, but I have not seen any mention of it on the blog in quite some time, and certainly not since the post I referred to in this article.

      • Guest

        So what do you think they did, killed it off like the Christmas turkey?

        What is there to say in the blog, we are still working on it?

        Don’t you think that the major change promised in the blog by DMOZ2 would take a little time to write, test and sort. I am sure that you would be among the first to complain if DMOZ2 was launched without proper testing and it proved to be full of bugs.

        • Chris Crum

          You’re putting words in my mouth. I think it will be interesting to see what they come up with. I don’t know what there is to say in the blog. An update would be nice, but they haven’t even updated the copyright notice on the blog since 2007. You would think that if they want to maintain some interest in Dmoz, they would bring it up from time to time. As I noted in the article, along with the lack of updates, there are likely changes happening behind the scenes. I’m not sure what this has to do with killing the Xmas Turkey.

          • Guest

            Which words did I put into your mouth?

            I would prefer that staff to concentrate on getting the work done that needs to be done for DMOZ2 than fiddling with copyright notices. But you think that not mentioning something means it has gone? That’s what the reference to the Turkey was about, a major project is not just killed off, it takes time and money.

            It is still interesting that almost every comment on here is from people who have not had a site listed. Many have broken the guidelines of teh site they berate by submitting more than once. How about you doing an article that addresses the reason for existence of DMOZ by and through the eyes of DMOZ. Much frustration comes from you and others not realising that this simply is not a directory driven by what sites can be listed. Ones that do that exist to make money, DMOZ exists to be a hobby for editors and what value that gives to any link is of no consequence to us and if you read any comments about what Google does or does not like about directories what it likes it a discerning directory and a directory that does not exist to promote the sites it lists.

            Yes I am biased I am a DMOZ editor, and I do not represent the directory, staff, AOL or anyone else.

    • Guest

      You forget we can see your work. We can see the corruption in the ODP. You can talk about volunteering and the purity of thought but the multiple listings, the suspect categories, the exclusion of quality sites and the inclusion of crap sites all point to a failed project. Let’s be straight about it and acknowledge the system itself was broken for years< no editors could sign in. That might have been before your time. I have some sites in and some out. I no longer recommend DMOZ (since the interface was ‘broken’ back in 2005) There is got to be a better ‘hobby’ ?

  • seo basics

    Interesting and thought-provoking article – thanks for writing it!

  • Dmoz..??? I laugh

    I worked at Dmoz for 3 years and I decided to give it a break and I retired my account, and that was in 2003 after I joined in 2000. In 2006 I applied for reinstate, went to the public forums, and a nasty character who was a “Meta” told me to email “him with as much colabriative information that I could give him, that these are stumbling blocks not show stoppers”

    I gave him all the information I could remember, total number of edits, username, email address, what category I edited in, and the exact reason for leaving.

    I gave him all of that information and it was correct, he then told me he did not believe that I was who I said I was and that I was trying to hack into dmoz and that if I tried again that AOL would take legal actions.

    Why would an editor say something like that, and from what ive heard he has recently just resigned as Meta back to editall.

    I hope Dmoz goes under, this thing is ran by editors, or people who get just a little bit of power and abuse it. This is quite sad, when I edited there I was close to editall and everyone loved me or well I was known anyways and I was doing good, it was a good time.

    From what ive heard Dmoz probably wont be around much longer, new editors are not editing because after they add content to a category they request another then get denied because they dont have X amount of edits to have another category granted.

    When your new there you need to be guided and helped not told that “You need to work more in your category before requesting another one.” Thats bull hocky when I edited there it was simple, add content rich and good quality websites pertaining to the category you edit in.

    This project will go down in history as a joke and I hope it does, the power hungry people, who have nothing else to do in there spare time, that sit around and do nothing but surf the web, find out that there is more to life than a stupid website.

    There is a website corruptdmozeditor.com I believe look at that, look at the screenshots of the forum where they actually up to this day still make fun of people’s submissions.

    I think this stinks and I can see it falling apart, I think it’s going to cost AOL much more in the end, because they have to employ people to have 24/7 support incase anything goes wrong with the site.

    Ive also heard that the new 2.0 may be coded in php or possibly C or C++ im not sure about that, but atleast it would work better than CGI.

    • Guest

      I was also an editor. You said, “This project will go down in history as a joke and I hope it does, the power hungry people, who have nothing else to do in there spare time, that sit around and do nothing but surf the web, find out that there is more to life than a stupid website.” You hit the nail right on the head. Perfect.

      Also, my business website (unrelated to my regional editing category) finally, after a couple of years, got listed in a tech security category. Every so often my site gets a visit from that DMOZ link- only thing is, if you go to dmoz.org and search for my company name you will get exactly nothing.

  • http://www.riantor.com Guest

    Yes people in my country also do many complain about Dmoz. I think all list of website will be sold out soon.

  • http://www.snerdey.com Snerdey

    In the beginning of my company I went to the DMOZ website and placed my website to be listed and WOW did I get a slap in the face of rudeness and just totally unprofessional treatment cause I selected the incorrect category by accident. Then they refused cause we sell templates.. well, sure we sell them but we also custom edit them for clients, toll free support, 24 hour service etc..

    I never went back, I never advised any clients to use it either. I’m a 1st impression kinda person, so whatever happens with them.. good for them.

    Old saying.. “Live by the sword, Die by the sword”.. one of my IT buddies always says that when someone gets upset over something and points blame at people/businesses that only try to help.

    Treat others how you want to be treated right? — Get a grip DOMZ!

    Have a great day,

    Follow us on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/snerdey

  • http://www.SEO-writer.com David @ seo-writer.com

    So, here I am wondering why WebProNews is stirring up this old ghost and perpetuating the myth that DMOZ still exists. The doctors declared it dead several years ago.

  • Guest

    I hope DMOZ stays dead. The way that director operates is a disgrace.

    • Dmoz!! You suck!

      Exactly what director?? there is no director it’s a community ran site. There is a editor in cheif but all he is; is an editor that has been there forever he dosn’t own Dmoz he is just an Admin.

      Aol actually owns Dmoz, and even there all they have is a project manager. Its all BS.

  • http://www.thrashirc.com AnthonyThrash

    Nine years ago is was important to have your site listed in dmoz. Now, with the surge of social networking sites and traffic, dmoz is irrelevant.

  • http://www.istanbulstay.com Dogan Tuna

    Hello from istanbul,
    I hope DMOZ is dead.I stiil waitting in 5 years. I am 46 years old.
    I dont have 5 years..
    Best Regards.

  • http://www.ssrichardmontgomery.com ron

    I tried many time to get my site listed (over 5 years old historical information) Including a submission by a professional submission company who would normally charge telephone numbers to clients, some time ago as a favour by the owner for helping him on a non computer or website related matter. No listing ever appeared. My personal opinion is that it who you know at DMOZ as to whether your site is listed,not the site itself.

  • http://www.wildheartwestern.com Maui Man

    So I looked on Wiki and found the actual definition of DMOZ

    DMOZ – noun
    something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce:

    That explains it all I guess. Submitted my site over three years ago, still waiting……

    • It is a Joke

      I remember a few years back re reading the editor guidelines, that once you submitt a site if it dosn’t meet up to that editors standard they have all right to delete it, they then tell you to not re submitt your site cause they dont want to have to review it again.

      They also have a blacklist that if you are quote “Spamming” or submitting you site more than 2 or 3 times your Ip address will be banned and the site just becomes not functional, such as time outs, not loading or dns errors.

      When adding your site most or some editors will do a Whois to see all of your information, I have seen in the forums where they say this site came from the Ip address ` and this is the Whois info so they know your name, address and everything the only way to get around it is to protect the whois information.

  • http://www.immobilienteneriffa.com erge

    DMOZ is a complete waste of time!!! some of my sites are in, most of the sites listed are so old that it hurts in the eyes. those sites which are in the directory have never received a single visit from DMOZ. If i make a link somewhere for a site of mine, I want to see visitors coming in from there. Pagerank times are over. relevant for me are sites which bring me visitors. nothing else … therefore forget DMOZ

  • http://www.brazilianmiracle.com Brazilian Miracle

    DMOZ adds no value to search at all. The results are not updated, new relevant sites seem to be excluded or not included in a timely manor. I stopped caring about them years ago and dont really notice that much of a difference. I actually had a site that was in their directory for years de-listed with no explanation. I hope it just shuts down and all of the self important elitist editors get canned from their unpaid high horses…..LOL the masses will always prevail its only a matter of time when Google either gets de-throned or DMOZ becomes irrelevant to search in general. Alexa is going to bite it to…

  • http://www.stuffdone.com Stuff Done

    DMOZ could vanish tomorrow and no one would care. If articles like this didn’t mention them no one would remember them…they have become useless because they list so little new stuff and have made it clear they really are not interested in listing anything any more.

    I don’t know what their point is? Does anyone ever really search there? Do web site owners even bother to submit sites there any more?

    No, DMOZ is a thing of the past with only it’s ashes online to remind a few that they tried and failed to mean something.

  • http://www.layeasy.com Denis Carr

    DMOZ in it’s current format is dead…

    I think the idea was great but they haven’t moved with the times. If DMOZ was to embrace social networking where Facebook members etc could contribute to site ratings on DMOZ or some idea like that then it could led to a re-birth…


  • Downpour

    DMOZ is the biggest waste of time. I don’t even bother submitting websites to it. It’s a blackhole for directory submissions.

    I think DMOZ should not be considered a credible directory, and is a nightmare for any PR companies or web folks to deal with.

    It’s just one directory, hit the snooze button when you hear any noise about DMOZ and move on. Waste your time somewhere else where the editors will actually even TELL you your entry has been accepted/rejected.

    I tell everyone I come across to “feel free to submit, but don’t hold your breath”.

    • I Agree!

      You are right, we worry about SEO and stuff, well look at DMOZ its almost #1 next to AOL :) think about it! They dont care about people or websites all they actually care about is themselvs nothing else.

  • Guest

    I think one of the biggest problems with DMOZ is their lack of communication and transparency. Their rules are fairly simple, but following all the rules, my March 2007 submission has seemingly fallen into a black hole. I say ‘seemingly’ because I’ve heard nothing. It may be on a list to be reviewed still, it may have been rejected by April 07, it may be on a banned list for some reason. Without a reply there is no way to know.

    I have read so many other stories similar to mine where the web owner is waiting patiently for their site to be reviewed and included. The DMOZ rules clearly state they will not respond to status requests. The editors only give generic answers in forums, often dismissively. For a new web owner it is extremely frustrating hearing SEO ‘experts’ tell you to get into DMOZ only to find there is no way in and no one to talk to. This lack of communication is the biggest cause of the negative comments about DMOZ imho. If they gave a simple way to check status, a simple email explaining why something was rejected and maybe some positive guidance to help rejections improve for future inclusion, there would be more respect.

    Some stats from DMOZ would be nice too. # of new additions, average review time, etc. If there is no abuse by editors, this information surely couldn’t hurt them. It would give potential users a better idea of what to expect and let them know that something is actually happening behind the scenes.

    I resubmitted March 2010 and probably will do so again in March 2013. I’m long past worrying about it but as my site is hugely relevant to the submitted category, includes lots of unique content and linked to from other quality sites, I wonder how many more quality sites are omitted and how Google can consider DMOZ relevant with so much information missing.

    • You got It Again

      Basically they have a submission queue I dont even know why, the last time I was able to see the forum I saw editors saying, “I never Review submissions I just delete them” they search google and yahoo for sites to add. Everyone there worries about thier edits not people that want their site listed.

  • http://www.abm-enterprises.net/wallpaper Vicky

    Thank you for this very interesting update!

  • http://www.dfforum.org DebtFinance

    Its very clear DMOZ is becomming used less and less. When is the last time you’ve seen a reference to them when doing a search. In contrast to that, a site like EzineArticles has many referenced listings on the top of Google when doing searches.

    With many very powerful social and bookmarking sites available that have from 10,000+ backlinks and referenced listing, and actually willing to list your sites, there’s hardly a need for a site like DMOZ anymore.

    Sorry DMOZ, but you can kiss my ass!

    • Guest

      You got it there are so many sites out there these days that will do this for free.

  • http://www.SEORapture.com Jeff

    DMOZ is corrupted worse than a hard drive in a magnet store. The only way you get in is if you’re an editor or you know one personally. Even then it may require sexual favors, I’m not sure. I believe it was once a really good idea, but right now it’s a joke… and not a very funny joke to those of us who have extremely relevant, valuable sites but never get even a word of rejection back.

    Let’s face it there are thousands of publications and web sites out there that get swamped with several levels of magnitude more submissions than the bozos at dmoz, and yet they somehow manage to send a response. I think that’s the most frustrating thing. Out of dozens of high quality submissions to dmoz, I’ve never once even received a note saying they received my information, reviewed it, trashed it, or anything. All you get is silence. It’s a waste of electricity to even keep the site online.

    The question here is simple: Why do we need a search-engine trusted directory that only contains sites within three degrees of the corrupt circle of editors? It’s bad enough you have to pay $300/yr to be in Yahoo, but at least they’re honest about it.

    I personally would be ecstatic to hear that DMOZ was delisted and cranked down to PR 0 in Google.

  • http://www.8womendream.com Catherine

    I love the Guest post comment ‘DMOZ is a friggin’ sham and’ – he says it all.

    I also think it isn’t important at all now that Twitter search and Facebook’s search integration is there. Social search is where it is going and DMOZ won’t be a part of it, for which I am glad.

    At work we don’t teach our business owners about them for social media and their websites and we advise all bloggers who come to us to ignore them completely and focus their efforts elsewhere.

    If DMOZ ever bothered to answer an email they might not be so hated on the web and thought of as completely irrelevant by the webmasters of the world.

  • http://www.abm-enterprises.net/wallpaper Vicky

    I am laughing because I just read all the other comments. Not one of them is paying any attention to the reason Google still considers DMOZ important: In East Asian languages, it’s easier to browse thru categories than to search by typing.

    • Guest

      My question is why does Google hold on to Dmoz, and well did you see the last time they actually updated their RDF dump with Dmoz?

      I think they do it, just because they have the directory listed and they probably get complaints about them not updating it, so they do it to please their web surfers.

  • http://www.financialsforyou.com Lucy

    I applied to be an editor in their business section, thinking I could maybe help improve the quality of accounting information out there. I came across so many poorly researched accounting and finance sites as I was building mine that it was mind boggling.

    They turned me down in probably 2 hours (I thought that was a very quick decision…). I guess they didn’t need someone who is actively involved in building a web presence (and able to appreciate such efforts of others), someone not only trained as an accountant (Controller) but also with editing experience (translated several books), etc. I was actually even a little reluctant to get myself involved, because I have so little time for extra activities…

    Oh well, I said, they’ve made their choice.

    But then I shared in some discussion re. their decreasing relevance on one of the Internet forums and told of my experience. I got attacked by one of their editors, extremely suspicious of my motives, not only for applying to DMOZ but for even posting a comment on their forum. He said “you are probably just trying to get the number of posts up here, aren’t you?”

    Needless to say, I haven’t been back to that forum, but if this is the attitude towards the Internet users they have, then better stay away. You will be viewed with suspicion and tons of condemnatory (not discerning) judgment instead of as who you really are.

    I hope their relevance goes even further down, unless they change something around in their organization.

    • http://www.auntreeneeswebsites.com webmaven

      I got accepted, after submitting samples of my edits several years ago. However, I got kicked out once because they made up a new rule about how often you have to sign in (not sending an email till I was already kicked out) Also, they have VERY strict rules about where to place sites and how to list them. I’m sometimes afraid to work on a submission because I don’t know where to put it and it’s safer to leave it alone.

    • The Trick

      The trick is to apply in a totaly differnt part of the directory not in a part that you have related websites to.

      They research you front and back they search your name on a Whois database and everything, why do you think only metas can approve you because they have editor made tools with the support of different companies to be able to see if you are who you say you are.

      Why do you think they have an Affiliations database every editor except Meta, Root, Admin and higher has to submitt their sites that they have either, made, help make, produce, programm, or even use. I was told by a meta that I didnt list my myspace page and thats why I was never approved for further categorys, I said Im not going to list my personal page I listed myspace that should be enough.

      Like stated in a prev post they seem very power hungry.

  • http://www.bbsport.info Josep

    From my point of view, DMOZ has become useless day and day.
    What’s the point of keeping a directory that is very hard to submit to?
    I have wasted my time months and years submitting my sites just to no receive any answer, any update, just anything.
    Furthermore, if you ask to an editor polite and patientlly, you always get the same answers:
    “Have patience”, “it can take several months…”, “do not worry about it”
    “Do not submit many times or you will be considered a spammer”, but you are never updated about your status…
    In other words, they say: Just , come another day (or other year)

    I stopped wasting my time in DMOZ months ago, there are many other interesting places to invest our time better.

  • Guest

    I hope DMOZ dies. It’s frustrating black box. There are better directories out there.

  • http://newwebmastertools.com Kevin Hillman

    Well, The Editor in Chief at DMOZ is full of hot air. They are about to become obsolete and he knows it. The editors are only taking paid inclusions under the table and are really not capable of managing the categories properly.

    I know for a fact of a competing product that will kill DMOZ the rest of the way and the editors of this one will all be owners of the site the answer is 3×4 and that is all I can say in this realm.
    You will see it and then you will understand the concept that will put the power of search back in the hands of the webmasters and not search giants that will do nothing without profit.
    See you there

  • http://www.sats.net/ gala

    I don’t think so. I have been trying to get listed for two years now without any results. I’ve even tried to be an DMOZ’s expert. No way! I have been trying to contact them, to find any info about them.Who are these people? Do they do anything? If they don’t want to work then resign! Let’s move forward.
    I don’t appreciate you – DMOZ

  • http://www.sahelmarketing.com Internet Marketing Experts

    I gave up on DMOZ years ago after several unsuccessful attempts to get my web sites listed in that directory. It’s a lot of worthless work. It’s decline over the years just illustrates the frustration many of us has accumulated. In the end DMOZ lost respect in the eyes of many webmasters. Besides directories are being replaced by social media channels and other means of getting information.

  • http://www.totalweddingshop.com D Mahoney

    When attempts are made to list a site and the DMOZ site transports to either a bad link or an error, it should become blatantly clear that they are not interested in offering a useful service. If one were to take the time to view the listings, they would soon realise that many of the “accepted” sites are questionable at best leading to one’s belief that perhaps the Open Source Directory is of no value. If you are lucky enough to get on it then it cannot hurt; however, to be perfectly candid, when it takes a substantial amount of time and effort to track it through and cajole some twisted little editor to review the site, you must ask yourself is it worth it?

    The CEO’s comment about making serious changes has not happened, at least not yet; so one assumes that his determination is much like a politician’s when it comes to change.

    Is DMOZ a worthwhile directory? Not any longer.

  • Guest

    I agree to all replies about the uselessness of DMOZ. It has been a frustrating and waisting of time being submitting again and again. Nevertheless, I wonder if Google is the right alternative. With their method, when people pay more they get abetter placing, is very much wrong. Quality suffers, because money is what matters. A pity!

  • http://kevincole509.com KevinCole509

    I have absolutely no use for DMOZ. I don’t know if it’s elitism, latent or explicit, or what, but a lack of transparency and consistency calls into question their list/ignore decisions. I don’t know enough about their inside workings (does anyone?) to accuse them of corruption, but at least bad judgment and possibly arrogance are, I believe, good possibilities.

    Despite the yammer about the value of human-mediation, there is question enough about impartiality of their decisions that I assign them no credibility whatsoever. The unwillingness to be forthcoming with reasoning behind their decisions beyond, “thus saith the editor,” makes unlikely that “trust us, we’re the editors” will be credited over the long haul.

    Pull the plug on their ability to affect anything, Google. Pull it now!


  • http://www.freewebs.com/starchoicesrl/ Ioan Dumitrescu

    Is a useful site for informations promotions

  • Guest

    Having spent ages getting sites listed, seing some competidors sites getting listed, I am sure that something weird is going on. I dont find DMOZ trustworthy and believe google should be careful. Google is still strustworthy but relying on DMOZ could be dangerous.

  • http://www.mastersdegreepsychology.com Rich

    I was under the impression that DMOZ is now thoroughly discredited. The way in which sites are accepted or rejected is highly questionable, with allegations of ‘paid’ inclusion rife.

    It is the nature of the internet that things change, almost on a daily basis. DMOZ had its time and that time is now gone. It is just not able to keep up with the pace.

    You would think that Google would be among the first to realize that.

    Having said that, try Googling ‘fastest laptops’ and check out the 3 year old forum posts on the first page.


  • Guest

    Dmoz should close their doors. For several years I have tried to get my sites listed and was always rejected, yet there were competitors sites listed. Why was that? I questioned them but never got any answers. Google needs drop them . There are many other directories out there that are much more reputable.

    • Guest

      I agree, you submit a site and never got a reply. We had sites submitted for over a year and nothing. They are not work the electricity my computer runs on.

      We got indexed above our competitors for good site content without the need of DMOZ. I even offered to help but not once did I ever get a reply. I think they are dead in the water unless someone knows different.

  • http://www.freetranslationclassifieds.com web_junkie

    I submitted one of my websites to DMOZ for listing some years ago and got lucky: it got listed within a few weeks. (I’ve tried getting another site listed on about three occasions, but no luck.)

    Since then, the listed site has ranked at the top of page one searches in Google for keywords that are highly relevant to my business. I suspect that the DMOZ listing has some bearing on how this particular site ranks.

    Of course, web tenure (i.e. the longevity of the website) and PPC campaigns are also important factors in this site’s search results, among many others.

    Anyhow, until such time as Google states that DMOZ is irrelevant, I wouldn’t dismiss a DMOZ listing. Put it another way, I wouldn’t ask DMOZ to remove my listing. Would anyone?

    DMOZ seems to have mastered the art of pissing off serious web marketers but, like it or not, they’re not dead until Google says they are.

    On the other hand, I agree with most of the contributors here. Further submissions to DMOZ submissions seem to be a waste of time. And that may yet be their undoing. If web users consider them irrelevant, the Google may eventually come to the same conclusion.

  • http://www.simplify.co.in Beck

    Yes, there used to be days of DMOZ, it was like a Dinosaur at some time and like the Dinosaur vanished DOMZ got face the same destiny unless they reform themselves to something else…

  • Guest

    I just tried to list my site on DMOZ, and I have not seen such an unfriendly website in quite a while.

    My particular gripes are:
    1. I need to put my site in an Auto Glass category; there is no such category. How can you put Auto Glass in an Auto Repair – Exterior category? Does not a window have a dual nature, inside and outside?

    2. Their site it thrashed. I keep getting error messages when I try to add my url.

    3. DMOZ is not intuitive. Poorly designed.

  • http://www.doubleplus.com Susan P

    I was a DMOZ editor for awhile. I took over the MivaScript and Miva Merchant categories because they weren’t being monitored by anyone. But it’s a small niche and there aren’t lots of submissions, and since I didn’t have edits to make for awhile, they turned off my access. It seems like they only want editors if they’re willing to make a large commitment – I was expected to add categories since mine were small. However, that wasn’t something I had time for, nor interest in – I just wanted to cover Miva-related categories because at the time, it accounted for 98% of my work online, which made me an expert.

    Anyway, my point is that they should accept quality work without expecting a certain quantity of categories/submissions. As it is, they seem to be under”staffed” yet not willing to try and fix that. I was left not with the impression that DMOZ is corrupt (though some editors could be, I imagine) but that it’s become a monster that can no longer be tamed. And in the movies those monsters always get killed ;)

    • fantabuBlast

      The were right to turn off your access. I am of the understanding that editors for a category not only review submited sites, but actively browse the web for sites relevant to their category, which by your own admission, you were not doing, but rather sitting on your hands and waiting for submissions.

      Don’t get me wrong, I actually think that dmoz’s relvance in its current form is predecated. They do have some “obtuse” working ethics and regimes, given, but they also have had (and the operative word is HAD) a good operating model when it was relevant and while it lasted, but you were taking the proverbial PISS!

  • http://www.homearchitects.com Home Design

    well, my experience with dmoz has been frustrating, so I don’t bother anymore. You’d think that with my website being in the top 4 Google listings for home architects (our site is actually called: www.HomeArchitects.com), that we should have no difficulties in getting listed on dmoz. After about a year of trying, I’ve given up. I even went through their exhausting requirements for offering my free council as a reviewer of similar websites. Twice. They ended up sending me some link that was supposed to be used to connect to some other place on their website to allow me to answer any questions they might have and their link did Not work.
    I did notice that some of the other dmoz “reviewers” were actually competitors of mine, whose offices were not that far away, so yes, it does make you wonder what the editorial process is like there and if there is any oversight quality control.

  • http://www.garycjohnsonlaw.com GCJ

    DMOZ editors are, as I understand it, volunteers not paid for reviewing submissions. I tried to volunteer for a category but was declined. Probably because I am an expert within my category, my site has not yet been indexed by DMOZ, and perhaps the editors felt that I would be overly prejudiced. Maybe so. But to have only 13 lawfirms/attorneys listed from the State of Colorado is ridiculous!

    For example, I suggested one of the leading divorce firms in Colorado, Litvak Litvak Mehrtens and Epstein, http://familyatty.com/, for inclusion. They are not listed yet. I also suggested www.gerashtoray.com They are not yet listed. Nor is my site http://www.garycjohnsonlaw.com I just wanted to help. The email turning me down was pretty blunt.

    The DMOZ concept of human indexed sites is good. My experience is that they take an awful long time to index. Therefore I believe that their importance will decline.

    • FantabuBlast

      taking a long time to list would be one thing, but did you know tht you could be listed in a directory in dmoz but NOT appear in the dmoz search front end? i.e, if you search for your site on the dmoz.org front page, the site is not in the results, but if you browse to the directory and search or browse, the site is there?

      The relevance of a human edited directory is only useful IF (and only if) the techology behind it, not to mention the management of that index, is effective. DMOZ fails on both and the chief editor is full of hot air!

      • http://www.garycjohnsonlaw.com GCJ

        I did not know that nepaluz. I am a complete novice in the internet world. But your comment makes DMOZ appear even less relevant.

        • http://www.garycjohnsonlaw.com GCJ

          BTW, all url’s submitted here tagged “no-follow” In my comment above it was not my intent to “spam” but rather to give examples of good attorney sites that are not listed.

      • Guest

        Do a search on the front page then go all the way down to the bottom and you will see when the last time the database was updated if you submitted it months befor they updated then they deleted the submission or placed it in their Test category to make fun of it for some stupid reason.

        • FantabuBlast

          Its one thing checking the bottom of the page for the last date that the page was updated.Its completely a different thing when even the underlying database does not reflect the true state of the data it holds. For the tech heads here, would the suitable definition of this be CORRUPT DATABASE?

          The more I think of the state of affairs at dmoz the more I get furious at Google. They tweak their algorithms and send to us (webmasters) noises to (at a not inconsiderable cost) optimise our sites for real time search and yet they still rely on a corrupt database? Google MUST come out in the near future and clearly state what relevance dmoz is to thier SERPs else ……. (I really don’t know what to do????) Well, CLASS ACTION (lack of due care resulting in financial loss, abetting fraud, whatever!)

  • Linces Marques

    Dmoz is ridiculous, for 2 years i try to include some sites.
    Corrupt admin

  • http://thomaswebb.net thomas

    I had frustrations getting sites listed in the directory. They have a very old-fashioned idea of what websites should be and their policies. Basically, the directory is hostile to web apps but friendly to basic how-to sites. If their 1995 minds can’t wrap their head around it, it will be rejected as “not enough content” or “miscategorized” because there isn’t an appropriate category for it anyway and it takes an act of congress to add one.

    I was an editor for a while and I found the process to be tedious. After getting disillusioned by the bureaucracy, I kind of ignored it and eventually got kicked out for not logging in enough (my category had few submissions anyway). Their loss. They went from 1 apathetic editor of the category to zero editors.

    It seems to be social bookmarking is the best alternative out there I know of. What other alternatives are out there that have the promise of holding the weight that Dmoz has/had? I like reddit’s procedures, but what out there is publicly editable (by the people, not by elites – think Wikipedia or slashdot or digg) that promises the semantic web? I’d rather deal with the tyrrany of the masses than the tyrrany of the bureaucracy any day.

    • FantabuBlast

      Wikipedia? you must be having a laugh!
      That is one site that has “master page editors” that fit the true description of dmoz editors! I have listed some of my sites as external references (I am registered with them too!) and, despite the references containing some competitor sites, they have pulled my listing off and banned me from the site for a couple of hours at a time! (I won’t mention being accused of spamming!)

      Ma friend, there is no thing like a publicly editable Wikipedia! The thing is run by some junta!

  • http://www.herbal-supplements-tricajus.com tricajus

    I’ve been trying to register a couple of times lately but always encounter submission problem at their site. It’s really cumbersome and frustrating. Why not turn it into a paid submission instead?

    • FantabuBlast

      For the last 5 years they (I mean the editors on resource-zone.com) have been saying that these are temporary problems. Infact, if you really have the time, browse through their fora posts and you will be surprised!

      Of-coure, they keep reminding us that AOL (their parent) hosts the servers and that they are aware of the issues. I am personally convinced that they simply switch the servers off when they feel that the backlog has grown to un-manageable levels.

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sidebar Top
  • Sidebar Middle
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter
  • Sidebar Bottom