Do you have any websites listed in DMOZ?

[RayUK]

The 'received wisdom' is that unless you are an editor, or know an editor there isn't a lot of point in submitting especially if you have a gambling site. Whether this is actually true or not I don't know but I see it enough on various fora. Also Googling 'dmoz editor bribe payment' or some such will throw up a load of stories. Again, probably to be taken with a pinch of salt but there is enough of a bad smell about the place that I am suspicious.

Having said that I just submitting my site for giggles. It won't get in (four months old!) but yeah. I can eat my metaphorical hat if it gets listed

[lauferb]

I have 1 site listed in dmoz but it's not gambling related but an old site of mine with database tools

[gamblingbutler]

We bought the site

onlinepoker.ro

a while ago and turns out it is indeed listed in DMOZ.

Applied for BBB a while ago but wasn't accepted yet.

[baldidiot]

We bought the site

onlinepoker.ro

a while ago and turns out it is indeed listed in DMOZ.

That raises an interesting point - if you buy a domain that is listed in directories such as dmoz, yahoo or botw etc... Does the site stay listed or will it possibly be removed if/when they notice that the site/owner has changed?

[Simmo!]

That raises an interesting point - if you buy a domain that is listed in directories such as dmoz, yahoo or botw etc... Does the site stay listed or will it possibly be removed if/when they notice that the site/owner has changed?

I've bought and sold sites listed in DMOZ and never noticed them removed after. Might depend how on-the-ball the category editor is and how much you change the site.

[Professor]

I have noticed that a number of Dmoz editors are GPWA members. So knowledge about the inner workings of DMOZ is here and available. It would be cool to get some of the concerns about a "good old boys network" addressed.

If there is a formula that is the most effective way for being listed in DMOZ it would be greatly appreciated by all if it is outlined.

[universal4]

Lou, living here in Central Florida, you know how difficult it is to crack the "good ole boy network" when it exists....

Seeing some of what I have with the politics/city/county governements as well as police force etc down here in Kissimmee, sometimes I wonder how some of this still goes on....

Certainly if editors were suspected of collusion or coruption, they would likely never admit it and in fact would also likely change their ways if only even for a short time.

It appears that some of the categories that have higher potential of coruption have been adding more sites recently and I'm sure that there has been some pressure on editors to be more open.

Whether any of this pressure has helped or not time will tell.

I agree though with the general consensus that I have seen some sites listed that do not get anywhere near the quality standards they claim to acheive and yet some sites that deseve listings keep getting denied.

Rick
Universal4

[Doolally]

I believe DMOZ is definately influenced by factors outwith the quality of the sites in it.

[arkyt]

I believe DMOZ is definately influenced by factors outwith the quality of the sites in it.

When one person can have 6+ sites listed in just a few gambling categories while others dont have one, its pretty obvious it has nothing to do with quality. It gets even uglier when more than one person has 3-4+ sites listed in a category - sure appears to be major collusion going on!

[ddm]

I submitted a site recently and only realised I was in DMOZ b/c i saw it in my referrer logs.

Very interesting that there's some DMOZ editors here on GPWA.

[Nandakishore]

I submitted my site two years back. I don't even know whether they received it because they neither confirm receipt of a submission nor its acceptance. I actually wanted to apply for an editor post for software, but then I decided not to because I don't like an organization which is almost as intransparent as a dictator regime.

[chalkoutline]

Hi folks,

I have a site listed in a gambling category of DMOZ. I submitted the site way back in 2001/2002ish and it was included after just a few months. I guess things were just different back then. Afterwards I tried to submit other sites to DMOZ and none were ever listed.

I am sure it all depends on who edits the categories you are interested in. It is a total lottery I guess.

[casinogamespro]

One of my sites is also listed at Dmoz (under gambling guides). It was approved a few months after the submission. I did not receive any notification that this site was approved and listed.

[quicksilver]

The 'received wisdom' is that unless you are an editor, or know an editor there isn't a lot of point in submitting especially if you have a gambling site.

I haven't had any success getting my casino onto DMOZ and I'm not even a gambling affiliate site! I agree with you about needing to know the editor.

[MichaelCorfman]

That raises an interesting point - if you buy a domain that is listed in directories such as dmoz, yahoo or botw etc... Does the site stay listed or will it possibly be removed if/when they notice that the site/owner has changed?

In theory the change of ownership of a site should not effect the listability of the site within dmoz if the content of the site warrants a listing and the content is not significantly altered in a way that changes that after the ownership change.

But there is within dmoz a sense of wanting a quality directory that reflects sites with different sources of information and there is also a very strong desire not to dilute the directory with redundant mirrored information. So if two websites contain substantially similar information, particularly if they have a common owner, a decision can easily be made that it is not appropriate for both sites to be listed in the directory. Thus, while it is certainly quite possible for more than one site from a particular owner to be listed, the standard for uniqueness and breath and depth of content applied by individual editors is likely to be higher than if the sites did not share a common owner.

Michael

[MichaelCorfman]

(OH and I almost missed the old alert service "WinRiskFree" on this page: http://www.dmoz.org/Shopping/Sports/Software/ which links to a page which says very clearly "This site is no longer active.")
Is any more evidence needed to demonstrate that DMOZ is a Dinosaur?

Dead listings like this are relatively easy to have removed from dmoz. As an editor there are special ways to make such a request, and so I've pointed out the issue with that site and expect it will be removed within a few days.

But anyone who notices this sort of issue can report it directly themselves. Here is a quote from the dmoz website about what to do:

Uh-oh, something is wrong. How do I tell someone so it can be fixed? If you find a broken link in the directory, please let us know! The process for doing this is similar to the site suggestion process. When you find the broken link, use the "Update Listing" link in the category header to access that category's reporting form.

Michael

[MichaelCorfman]

I have noticed that a number of Dmoz editors are GPWA members. So knowledge about the inner workings of DMOZ is here and available. It would be cool to get some of the concerns about a "good old boys network" addressed.

What I can say is that I have seen no evidence of a "good old boys network" influencing listings based on my experience within dmoz. And I know that in the work I am doing, and in the work of other editors I personally know, there is a very strong desire to be as objective as possible in the editing that is done.

But as I've said elsewhere, there are 85,000 editors in dmoz, so, as with any organization that size, there has to be abuses that have gone on from time to time.

My view is that within the dmoz community the "good old boys" are the folks that wear the vision of what they feel dmoz can be and a commitment to those ideals on their shoulders. And those "good old boys" hate any sign of corruption with a passion.

Sort of the same as here at the GPWA. Folks that are committed to working together for our mutual success in an ethical fashion earn respect. And those that sacrifice ethics for personal interests don't.


Michael

[MichaelCorfman]

If there is a formula that is the most effective way for being listed in DMOZ it would be greatly appreciated by all if it is outlined.

I think there is a simple formula for being able to have one website listed in dmoz. There are geographical categories within dmoz and, generally, reasonably constructed sites with original content describing a business will be listed in the appropriate category covering the geographic area where the business is located. So for a GPWA webmaster, I believe that means you have a very decent chance of being able to build and get listed a website about your business. The type of information you might include in such a site to make it unique include things like: The name and address of the business (you really need the address for the site to be listed in a particular geographic area), contact information, a bit of background information about you and the business, a list of the websites you offer (which is also good for SEO purposes) and the services the websites provide. If you have just one website, and include this type of information on the website, then you should be able to have that website listed geographically as your business website. Such geographic listings are generally completely independent of topical category listings.

Having a site included in a topical category, rather than a geographic category, is generally harder, and usually requires higher quality content. The extent to which that is the case will depend on what it means to be a quality website within the specific topical category in the eyes of the editor that makes a decision about adding your site. For categories within the gambling area, obtaining a listing can be a real challenge. Generally, you will want to be able to answer the following question affirmatively: "Do I believe an editor comparing my website with other websites listed in this category will easily decide my website offers new and different content that will result in the directory being viewed as more valuable based on its inclusion?"

You should also ask the question: "Does my website look like its objective is to generate affiliate revenue and the content look like it is marketing material based on that objective?" To the extent an editor feels the answer to that question is yes, you can forget about being listed in dmoz. A lot of gaming affiliate sites fail miserably on this front since their home pages are frequently filled with marketing offers such as sign-up bonuses and affiliate links based on those marketing offers.

You should also ask "Have I build up a large quantity of quality information on the site?" If you have a strategy of building lots of small sites for SEO purposes, there is a very good chance that none of them would be viewed as appropriate for listing in dmoz by editors. The greater the volume of unique quality content on your site, the better the chances of acceptance into the directory. Dmoz editors generally view that quality content is king.

Finally, realize that the standards are not completely uniform because different editors review different sites and because standards change over time. What it took to get listed in a particular category years ago might be different than it is today. When a site is listed, the question the editor is answering is "Do I think I should list this website given todays appropriate standards for this topical category?" When a site is removed, the question the editor is frequently asking is "Do I think another editor made a mistake adding this site or has the site changed in a way that means it should no longer be listed?" These are different questions, and so the answers are not always the same.

Michael

[TheGooner]

You should also ask the question: "Does my website look like its objective is to generate affiliate revenue and the content look like it is marketing material based on that objective?" To the extent an editor feels the answer to that question is yes, you can forget about being listed in dmoz.

A lot of gaming affiliate sites fail miserably on this front since their home pages are frequently filled with marketing offers such as sign-up bonuses and affiliate links based on those marketing offers.

Laughed at this response - laughed a lot in fact.

Are you suggesting that DMOZ is anti-commerce or is actively filtering out sites that are profitable? That approach would of course be anti-competitive - especially if it was shown that many of the editors also ran sites in this field. Indeed you could call it a conflict of interest.

Or is it that DMOZ prefers amateur efforts, outdated efforts, inaccurate efforts made by fellow internet enthusiasts, rather than commercial endevours?

It should not surprise DMOZ editors that online commerce fields like online gambling are indeed quite heavily monitised, and it should not be a valid reason for denying the application if they are representative of the field with solid information.

[MichaelCorfman]

Laughed at this response - laughed a lot in fact.

Are you suggesting that DMOZ is anti-commerce or is actively filtering out sites that are profitable? That approach would of course be anti-competitive - especially if it was shown that many of the editors also ran sites in this field. Indeed you could call it a conflict of interest.

Or is it that DMOZ prefers amateur efforts, outdated efforts, inaccurate efforts made by fellow internet enthusiasts, rather than commercial endevours?

It should not surprise DMOZ editors that online commerce fields like online gambling are indeed quite heavily monitised, and it should not be a valid reason for denying the application if they are representative of the field with solid information.

Actually, I think I just did not state what I was trying to say properly in that question. What I should have said is "Does my website look like its objective is simply to generate affiliate revenue through the use of marketing hyperbole and marketing material rather than by providing solid original content that is a valuable information resource? Plenty of gaming websites have the former without the latter being present in any significant way.

Your website, Gooner's Guide, does provide solid original content, and as such I belive the decision of the editor who reviewed it to include it in dmoz was correct and consistent with the guidelines. But if that content was taken away and only sales pitches were left together with affiliate links, then it would not be the sort of site that would meet dmoz listing guidelines.

Because there are a lot of gambling-related websites out there, and a lot of webmasters who propose totally unsuitable junk websites for inclusion within dmoz, first impressions of what a site is about can make a difference in whether or not a site is deemed appropriate for listing under the editing guidelines.

Michael