DMOZ is GONE!
 

Have you read the following article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DMOZ in 2005
(a.k.a. The Open Directory Project)
By Phil Craven (c) 2005 WebWorkShop

The original concept of DMOZ was excellent for its time. The DMOZ site's About page makes these statements about the concept, and about the reasons for the directory's creation:-

"Automated search engines are increasingly unable to turn up useful results to search queries. The small paid editorial staffs at commercial directory sites can't keep up with submissions, and the quality and comprehensiveness of their directories has suffered. Link rot is setting in and they can't keep pace with the growth of the Internet."

"The Open Directory follows in the footsteps of some of the most important editor/contributor projects of the 20th century. Just as the Oxford English Dictionary became the definitive word on words through the efforts of volunteers, the Open Directory follows in its footsteps to become the definitive catalog of the Web."

But things have changed a lot since DMOZ began in the mid 1990s. Since then, Google came along with very relevant search results, and they were kind enough to show the other engines how to produce such relevant results. That caused dramatic improvements, to the extent that top search engines have been able to provide very relevant search results for some time, and they provide a lot more of them than DMOZ is able to do.

The small paid editorial staffs at commercial directory sites still can't keep up with submissions, but their backlogs are small when compared with DMOZ's massive backlog. According to reports, there are over a million site submissions that are waiting to be reviewed, and delays of several years between submitting a site and it being reviewed are not uncommon. The backlog problem is so huge that many editors have redefined the problem so that it no longer exists. To them there is no backlog, because the submitted sites are not there to be reviewed. They are merely a low priority pool of sites that they can dip into if they want to, and some of them prefer to find sites on their own.

Link rot (dead links) has become widespread in DMOZ through the years, and they certainly can't "keep pace with the growth of the Web". There isn't a single reason for the creation of DMOZ that DMOZ itself doesn't nöw suffer from.

So how come such an excellent original concept ended up with a directory that has the same problems that it sought to solve, and on a much largër scale?

One reason is that the Web has grown at a much faster pace than was perhaps anticipated, and the DMOZ editors simply can't keep up. Another reason is that there are simply not enough editors who are adding sites to the directory. At the time of writing, the DMOZ front page boasts 69,412 editors, but that is the number of editors that they've had since the beginning, and most of them are no longer there. A recent report stated that there are currently about 10,000 editors who are able to edit, and that only around 3,000 of those are active in building the directory. The word "active" is used to describe editors who actually edit quite often, but as little as one edit every few months is acceptable. The word doesn't mean "busy", although some of them are.

With so few people doing anything, it isn't even possible for them to keep up with the link rot in such a huge directory, and there's the ever increasing problem of listings that link to topics other than what they were listed for. It simply isn't possible for them to maintain the directory as they would like.

The idea of becoming "the definitive catalog of the Web" was a fine one, but it turned out to be an impossible dream. The purpose of DMOZ is dead. Today's search engines produce excellent results in large quantities, and much more quickly than drilling down into a directory to find something.

So is there any value at all in the DMOZ directory? As a useful catalog of the Web, and when compared with the major search engines, the answer is no, although a few people do find it to be a useful research resource. For website owners, the links to their websites that a listïng in DMOZ creatës are useful for search engine ranking purposes, but even those are becoming less useful as search engines improve, and seek to block out unwanted duplicate content from their indexes.

It was a fine concept, and it looked promising for a while, but the idea of DMOZ becoming the definitive catalog of the Web is gone. Improvements in the search engines eclipsed its value, and the growth rate of the Web meant that it could nevër achieve its goal. It began with an excellent concept, and they gave it a good shot, but it didn't work. The continuing growth rate of the Web ensures that it can nevër work. It continues as a good directory of a large number of web sites, but that is all. And not many people use directories when the search engines produce such good results, and so quickly.

About The Author
Article by Phil Craven of WebWorkShop. Phil is well-known in the world of webmasters and search engine optimization and his views have been sought and published by various online and offline publications.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

if it's not automated, it's hardly maintanable these days.
was a good project for a while.
RIP DMOZ

Simply put, Dmoz is the worst search engine on earth. Dmoz is shit because all the editors add their own sites, friend's sites, and deny listings to their competition. Dmoz is a cesspool of hypocrisy, corruption, and ass kissing.

Interesting... i just submitted some sites to DMOZ =|

Very interesting, maybe it is time to say RIP DMOZ

Maybe it's because it tried to be an 'open community' source. Will it improve if it's a private company using objective standards?

I got some sites listed years ago, haven't even tried for the last 2 or 3 maybe 4 years.

DMOZ still has a LOT of uses. It just has problems with its most OBVIOUS mission--ie., searching ON Dmoz itself. But if you think in terms of indirect benefits, it is quite useful :)

If the system wasn't crooked like it is now, it wouldn't be that bad.

May be. Lets buy that fucker, and start it over.

I'm in on that !

DMOZ worked for me while I was a reviewer and so were many friends of mine !

;-)

I recently got a new site listed on DMOZ - someone I know has a friend who edits that category.. anyway, the site now has a PR4 rating, with only three reported backlinks on Google.

I can't verify that this is because of the DMOZ listing, but I can't think of anything else. It's only about two months old..

DMOZ = Corruption. Editors were obviously abusing the system. I do not feel sad at all to see them go down in flames.

Thanks for saving me typing lots of words.. :)

yupper

since day one

dmoz was good several years ago but I'm not surprised they are shutting it down.

LOL I just submited my review site there yesterday!

Google is about the only thing breathing life into DMOZ still. It suffers from poor leadership and tools. Other open source projects on a large scale ( Wikipedia ? ) function just fine and are extremely useful.

I made a shitload of money back in the DMOZ/AOL days. Thankfully I kept some of it so I could live off it when they separated :( I used to be able to tell you to the minute when AOL did their DMOZ download/updates - I could hit "refresh" every 5 minutes and just watch the sales come in.

Ah, the good old days......

you know somebody :pimp ?

"DMOZ = Corruption. Editors were obviously abusing the system. I do not feel sad at all to see them go down in flames."
what goes around came around
finally
fuck them all

Amen brother i cant wait to see the day that damn site comes up as

www.dmoz.org cannot be found

I have even offered to pay to get listed and still no love. LOL

Wikipedia = :thumbsup

Does Wikipedia helps increase your site PR like DMOZ does?

I dont think you'd be able to get much from wikipedia since it wont actually link directly to you.. not sure how much just mentioning your websites address without linking to it helps though.

Funny that they say the idea won't work, rather than saying that DMOZ killed itself. They are short of editors who will do anything, but they summarily refuse anyone who volunteers to edit. You gotta replenish the volunteer pool, or the result is today's DMOZ.

damn, I finally got added to it like a month ago! too bad..

Viva Google ! RIP DMOZ.

you're all a bunch of haters. I'm a DMOZ editor and do my job to the "T". Idiots submit their sites tot he wrong cats, don't read the rules, terrible descriptions, wrong titles, etc etc etc. Then when you get rejected your cry corruption. thats a bunch of shit. anyone who wants to submit to DMOZ or any other directory, here's how.

Your site title is NOT your keyword phrase. It's the Domain name, or title of the site. ie your site: www.mydomain.com title = My Domain or MyDomain.com

Description does not contain ANY promo language. Offers a variety of pictures categorized in different categories. Features image galleries and links.

Submit to the right category! Don't take 2 minutes looking for a cat and say "this one will do" if there are two to three cats you might think you belong in, check to see what kind of sites are listed in them. If the sites aren't similar to yours in function, then you don't belong there.

I've always hated that.

Only if it has automation to do part of the job. Otherwise there is no chance it will be able to ever catch up, much less compete.

Burn motherfucker, burn

right on buddy, hate me rather then take the advice and get a free PR4+ link. great job

Very typical response. I've noticed the only people that ever stick up for Dmoz and say it's great are the corrupt editors, or the friends of the corrupt editors.

LOL because im an editor im corrupt?

Im not naiive enough to think there arent any corrupt editors on DMOZ. There's LOTS of editors. Do you file a complaint if you come accross a corrupt editor? If there's any substance to your claim they will be dealt with promptly.

As I said, I am an editor of my categories, I do my job, I have never taken any bribes, and I don't reject people cause they're my competitors. However I do get called a corrupt bastard all the time because I reject people who submit sites that are breaking every single rule. It's not a lot to ask... read the rules before you submit. If the hun doesn't list your gallery do you consider him corrupt?

Anyone here who has had their site denied, post it.. I will personally help you get it listed.

Exactly totally corrupt.

just charge $50 a year and have a staff handle it.

Do you think I'd be calling Dmoz corrupt and hypocritical if it was really that easy to just complain and have the problem solved? When one complains, they are complaining to corrupt editors. That is the hypocrisy.

I could list you about 1,000,000 links of freesites and other links that are pure spam added by editors. There are categories where the same person has 20+ different free sites listed in the category. There are domains which you can tell editors registered just so they could justify their descriptive titles and list themselves at the top of categories.

I dont know you or what categories you edit, so I can not say from personal experience that you in particular are corrupt. However, it is my personal belief that every adult category editor is corrupt.

List an example of a category thats corrupt.

List a site you submitted that got denied with title and description and which category you submitted to.

Put up or shut up.

Can I get an exactamundo!

Pick one, any one.

http://dmoz.org/Adult/Computers/Inte...nk_Sites/Free/

What's wrong with it?

Yeah fuck DMOZ :warning I got canned as an editor for no reason years ago. Yeah I listed my own sites, but I listed everyone elses also. :321GFY DMOZ

ahh the good old days..

and the banned former editor list..

At Jan Internext, a speaker mentioned that DMOZ is on its last legs and that it wouldn't be around much longer.

Yeah sure, go tell this to the dating category mods where you need to pay some fucks 200$ to list a few domains

My Katrina blog is up: heres my last 3 weeeks
 

Compiled from notes I jotted while the power was down and the progress afterwards. Now that the text is up I'll be adding my pics and videos. I'll fill in details and make it "look pretty later".

Edge of Destruction

I eventually got listed on DMOZ a few years ago and have been there ever since. I'm not mad at them.

I have tried to get over 20 sites listed followed the rules to the tee. Never once got a rejected email never got an email at all. Its a joke they let the sites sit in que for ever while all there sites are listed on the fly. Hopefully the owners of dmoz smarten up get a paid staff and charge per submission. :2 cents:

I agree, while it was common knowledge in the SEO field (and most everywhere else) that a DMOZ listing was critical, the directory itself was awful. And no doubt a lot of people paid, schmoozed and asskissed to get in there.

Got many sites listed there too...

RIP. :Oh crap