DMOZ Top Listed Domains Options

[dvduval]

I know there are some opportunists that are editors, and to some degree there are checks and balances, but I believe certain Metas pretty much do whatever they want. Some of these can be justified, so please don't think I am saying these are not supposed to be there (judge for yourself). Here is a listing of the domains with the most listings in DMOZ:
http://www.whois.sc/internet-statistics/dm...z-listings.html
If you look, I think you will find some real winners (sarcastic tone of course).

[bragadocchio]

That's an interesting list.

I went searching for some sites for a town out in Maryland. Within a couple of hours, I had a list that was about nine or ten times larger than the number of sites listed in DMOZ, and that was after deciding that 800 or so weren't worth collecting links to.

Be nice to see an editor in that category.

[dvduval]

I made this post on another popular forum also. Interestingly, I am no longer an editor. Meanwhile, think the list above speaks for itself. One person pointed out there are 1000s on CNN links that are no longer valid but nobody is taking the time to fix the problem. There are also cases where an editor ads lots of pages from their own site, when there are many other similar sites, yet lots of pages are not added. It's a case of human nature. People favor what is familiar to them.

[macdesign]

You have made the same post on every SEO forum I've looked at today. What's the point?

[dvduval]

You have made the same post on every SEO forum I've looked at today. What's the point?

Well, since I found my account suddenly deleted after making this post, I felt it might be good to go out with a bang! I'm actually a pretty laid back person normally, but today is the day to put the DMOZ thing behind me.

Do you have anything to add regarding the initial post?

[cbp]

Do you have anything to add regarding the initial post?

What was the point of the post? Its old news - the link has been posted many times before in many forums.

Where does it say in the guidelines that sites can't be listed lots of times?

[dvduval]

A site can be listed lots of times indeed.
Maybe we should just ignore it, right?
Editors are all volunteering to serve the greater good, and putting their own interests aside. Is this link old news? Should we just say everything is taken care of now? Or that it is none of our business?

maybe we should ... you be the judge

[macdesign]

Well, since I found my account suddenly deleted after making this post

As I pointed out to you in another forum, when I looked at your public profile, it was apparent you ceased to be an editor prior to making this post.

So there is no connection between your post and the fact you are no longer an editor. If in fact you were removed, it was not because of these many posts today.

Also, you were unaware that were no longer an editor until I pointed that out - indicating that you had not tried to log in for a while. Maybe you timed out from lack of editing.

[macdesign]

As far as the list, as CBP says, it's old and boring and pointless. If you had actually spent the effort, I'm sure you could find something in the list that is indeed questionable. But posting a list where 99.9% of the items are clearly and totally legitimate totally destroys any valid point that you could have made.

Here is a response from last month made to the last person that posted that same list.

http://www.dummies-guide-to-dmoz.org/wordp...ple-categories/

[dvduval]

Sorry to question the ODP. Obviously there is no abuse going on.
BTW, ODP has some great porn listings by editors who are surely volunteering there time to serve the greater good. I have purposely not mentioned specific examples, but many other people have done so. If this is a non-issue, then why does it keep coming up?

BTW, I'm sure you personally are an ethical editor and commend for that.

[Black_Knight]

What was the point of the post? Its old news - the link has been posted many times before in many forums.

and

As far as the list, as CBP says, it's old and boring and pointless.

If it is old news, I assume it is no longer true? If still true, it is still current news worthy of discussion. If you don't wish to take part, or find it boring, nobody is twisting your arm to post at all.

If searching for a point, why not take the point as a suggestion that unmerited multiple listings be cleaned up. That seems a worthy and constructive suggestion. If you have the time to follow all these posts, despite the fact that you proclaim them to be pointless and boring, then you must have way too much time on your hands and be desperate for something useful to do, right?

[dvduval]

Think about it...how many users actually use DMOZ itself?
The main benefit of a DMOZ listing is Google.
So why would someone "volunteer" to be an editor?

I know there are many justified cases for having multiple listings, but it still follows that if you are an editor, there is a STRONG likelihood that you will do the multiple listing thing for your own sites, but will not "volunteer" your time to do the same thing for the other quality sites that equally deserve multiple listings.

[Eddie]

speak for youself.

Why is there a "strong likelihood that you will do the multiple listing thing for your own sites, but will not "volunteer" your time to do the same thing for the other quality sites"

[dvduval]

I'm not an editor. I'm only speaking on behalf of say:
Porn sites that exist on the same server ip, have different whois information, and multiple listings.
hmmmm....

Again, I'm not going to give specific examples, but if you will look, you will find them. And now that DMOZ is more weighted toward google, and less weighted toward people actually using the DMOZ itself, the problem is only getting worse.

I'm glad if you are doing honest volunteer work. That is great.

[phaithful]

Think about it...how many users actually use DMOZ itself?

Uhm... I do. Should I be embarrassed? :oops:

I'm a web junkie and I like to learn as much as I can about the things that I'm interested in. I frequent many sites, but some don't update as quickly as I can absorb the information.

So I turn to a place where I know there are plenty of links available on the topics I'm interested in, where I don't have to spend hours sifting through SERPs.

I do realize that some categories seem to be under maintained and that from time to time I run into a site that shouldn't belong in the category in my opinion.

But in the same right, it's still a valuable resource for me.

[macdesign]

I know there are many justified cases for having multiple listings, but it still follows that if you are an editor, there is a STRONG likelihood that you will do the multiple listing thing for your own sites, but will not \"volunteer\" your time to do the same thing for the other quality sites that equally deserve multiple listings.

Perhaps this statement of yours indicating what you think editors will do, [and failing to understand why there are people who edit just because they enjoy doing it] reflect the role that you fulfilled when you were an editor and suggests possible reasons why you are no longer an editor.

[dvduval]

There have been enough complaints and specific documented cases that I know there is some corruption taking place. Actually, I believe NOT being an editor speaks much about my character.

[Black_Knight]

dvduval, I'm not quite sure what may be inferred about your character by you initially saying:

I found my account suddenly deleted after making this post

to then being told by macdesign:

As I pointed out to you in another forum, when I looked at your public profile, it was apparent you ceased to be an editor prior to making this post.

to now seem to be trying to claim some kind of moral high-ground for leaving voluntarily with:

NOT being an editor speaks much about my character

However I am sure that the thread is drifting far from a topic that is useful and interesting to others.

That when ordinary people are given an opportunity for selfish action, there are many that will do so is not news. There are many examples of editors losing their status to show that DMOZ does do what it can about such matters, and has done so for as long as I have been aware of the ODP.

Now, is there anything particularly notable about the list that you wish to discuss, or was simply announcing it (again, I have seen this link many times in the past few years) the sole useful part of this thread?