ODP and DMOZ
Analysis of the Open Directory Project (ODP), which is owned by AOL, and its directory DMOZ. Related subjects include:
I just picked out a few of the many unreviewed sites in my DMOZ categories to evaluate, and listed most of those I reviewed.
How did I choose them to get screened? Mainly, I picked out ones with focused descriptions, titles, and so on, that just seemed likely to be listable based on that info (which is the essence of what I see on the page where all the various submitted sites are linked). I correctly guessed that I’d be able to quickly understand what I was seeing and judge whether to list the site or not, quickly write the official site description, and so on. Read more
|Categories: Categorization and filtering, Directories, ODP and DMOZ, Search engine optimization (SEO)||2 Comments|
Give or take a corrected typo, here’s a challenge to DMOZ bashers I just wrote in the flame war thread.
If you want to do something that is:
C. Potentially useful
just go find a specific category with terrible listings, and publicize the fact with overwhelmingly clear proof of your assessment.
If that’s not EASY for you to do … then maybe DMOZ isn’t so bad after all, eh?
|Categories: Categorization and filtering, Directories, ODP and DMOZ, Social software and online media||1 Comment|
My latest thoughts about DMOZ and the ODP may be found in this blog comment thread.
The gist is:
- DMOZ has many problems, such as categories that are at least five years out of date.
- Newly, corruptly listed sites are NOT high on the list of problems.
- In fact, the attention paid to avoiding such corruption is a terrible drain on ODP resources.
- There are a lot of liars and/or idiots bashing DMOZ in the website owner community.
- robjones is a sarcastic jerk, but he’s our sarcastic jerk.
Or something like that. As I said, it’s a flame war …
Anyhow, I’m flying off on a two-week snorkeling trip Saturday, and should be much mellower soon.
|Categories: Categorization and filtering, Directories, ODP and DMOZ, Social software and online media||8 Comments|
Joost de Valk makes an interesting suggestion, namely that Wikipedia should drop all external links other than to DMOZ, and rely on DMOZ as the outside link directory. As division of labor, it makes perfect sense. However, it’s a total non-starter until at least two problems are solved. Read more
|Categories: Categorization and filtering, Directories, ODP and DMOZ, Ontologies, Spam and antispam||5 Comments|
- DMOZ is dead. Fiction!
- New site submissions are being processed. Partial fact.
- Pending site submissions were lost in the outage. Partial fact.
- Other non-public ODP data was lost in the outage too. Partial fact.
- New editor applications aren’t being processed yet. Fact.
- ODP editors are corrupt. Fiction!
- The ODP is secretive and deceptive. Largely fiction.
- If a DMOZ category doesn’t have a listed editor, it’s unlikely to get much attention. Part fact, part fiction.
- ODP editors hate search engine optimization. Partial fact.
- ODP editors hate SEOs. Partial fact.
I shall explain. Read more
|Categories: Categorization and filtering, Directories, ODP and DMOZ, Search engine optimization (SEO)||7 Comments|
Before saying anything about the Open Directory Project or the DMOZ directory it produces, I should offer several disclaimers.
- No editor speaks for the ODP, let alone for Time Warner/AOL/Netscape.
- No single editor’s opinions or choices control any edits in DMOZ, even if s/he is the sole listed editor of a category. Any of us can be overruled on any editing decision at any time.
- I’m effectively as new as they come, or at least was at the time DMOZ editing came back online (late December). There have been no new editors since the well-publicized outage, and I had next to no involvement with the project prior to the outage.
- Notwithstanding point #2, I’m quite opinionated, which I’m sure surprises approximately nobody. And my opinions quite often are different from those of the ODP mainstream.