Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

Dmoz Still Unable To Submit!


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#1 lee.n3o

lee.n3o

    Cre8asite Tech News Reporter

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1556 posts

Posted 17 November 2006 - 05:02 AM

http://www.dmoz.org/unavailable.html

I wonder if they are just trying to catch up on the backlog of submissions.... and there is no real problem! Been like that for a few days now... :)

#2 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 07:10 AM

Lee
I’ve just checked and it appears to be “up”
http://dmoz.org/add.html

TreV

#3 Nadir

Nadir

    Light Speed Member

  • Members
  • 976 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 08:05 AM

Lee
I’ve just checked and it appears to be “up”
http://dmoz.org/add.html

TreV


Nope, unfortunately, it's still unavailable. By the way, Microsoft shut down the bCentral directory...

Edited by Nadir, 29 November 2006 - 08:06 AM.


#4 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 08:43 AM

Yes it's down sorry - you don't get the error page until your are actually submitting - You'd think they would post an explanation/apology and display it in a prominent position, so people wont waste their time.

#5 lee.n3o

lee.n3o

    Cre8asite Tech News Reporter

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1556 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 09:20 AM

I have checked everyday since I posted the first message.... Very weird!!

#6 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 09:44 AM

That falls way below the high standards and professionalism I’ve come to expect from DMOZ as an organisation. Frankly I'm shocked.

Maybe it’s the annual DMOZ global convention and they just “shut up shop” for the week. :)

#7 ukdaz

ukdaz

    Light Speed Member

  • Members
  • 738 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 12:17 PM

That falls way below the high standards and professionalism I’ve come to expect from DMOZ as an organisation. Frankly I'm shocked.


From all the bad press they seem to have attracted over the past few months I for one am not surprised. Perhaps they need new "blood" at DMOZ??

Daz

#8 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:06 PM

From all the bad press they seem to have attracted over the past few months I for one am not surprised.

I haven’t been keeping up to date with the latest DMOZ gossip, :) What kind of things are they getting bad press about ?

TreV

#9 Guest_joedolson_*

Guest_joedolson_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:17 PM

If they are just trying to give themselves some time without submissions to get caught up, that's not altogether a bad thing: but it's a serious gaffe not to notify the public prior to submission that they aren't accepting them!

I certainly wouldn't mind if they were to get caught up, but it would only be a temporary solution - they'd be able to keep up for a few days (possibly), and then they'd be swamped again.

#10 JohnMu

JohnMu

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3518 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:58 PM

maybe it's true ....

#11 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 04:00 PM

It wasn't deliberate Joe. There was a crash. The public side was recovered fairly easily. (It's just a static copy though.) The real problem has been with the innards - the editing side. Don't ask me what exactly went wrong. But it was catastrophic. Editors haven't been able to edit at all since it happened.

The silver lining is that the new set-up that AOL has been working on in the wake of the crash should be an improvement. And we hope to see it in action fairly soon. I can't give an estimated time for lift-off though. Nor can I promise that submissions will be switched back on as soon as editors can get back to work. There may be technical reasons for a time-lag on that.

#12 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 30 November 2006 - 03:09 AM

What sort of muppetry is this? Maybe there's is no notice because they are arguing among themselves about how it should be worded. In the absence of a official explanation, I fear people will start to speculate - that's only human.

It's still not up and there's still no notice.

#13 egain

egain

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 30 November 2006 - 10:06 AM

It does seem to be dragging on a bit this.

"It wasn't deliberate Joe. There was a crash. The public side was recovered fairly easily. (It's just a static copy though.) The real problem has been with the innards - the editing side. Don't ask me what exactly went wrong. But it was catastrophic. Editors haven't been able to edit at all since it happened."

Surely there must have been a backup of the full system, for a system as widespread as DMOZ

#14 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 30 November 2006 - 12:08 PM

Here's what is says on the dmoz forum

We are currently experiencing technical problems with our servers. Currently the public pages are static pages that have been generated from a backup. This means:
(1) the public pages do not reflect the most recent updates made to the directory;
(2) scripted pages, including site suggestion and application forms, are not functioning; and
(3) editors are unable to check the status of new editor applications.

We do not currently have an ETA for the resolution of the technical difficulties. We will update this announcement when the system is fully functioning again -- please do not start threads asking why the system isn't working properly or when it will be available again. Thanks.


In plain English that means:
We don't know what's wrong or how long it will take to fix - don't ask again !
Signed
Kermit the Frog

#15 Wit

Wit

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1599 posts

Posted 30 November 2006 - 12:29 PM

Maybe they're just phishing for comments. Link-baiting if you will. Imagine the massive collection of cheery posts (and links) when dmoz appears to be online and functional again. Nice. Even when they're down, they're good :) :D

#16 egain

egain

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 30 November 2006 - 12:36 PM

LOL @ WIT

#17 sanity

sanity

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6889 posts

Posted 30 November 2006 - 04:16 PM

By the way, Microsoft shut down the bCentral directory...

Thank heavens. I've not been able to submit anything for months, tons of errors, nowhere to report them etc etc. Stuff like that gives you a bad name, erm ok a worse name...

#18 Guest_joedolson_*

Guest_joedolson_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 November 2006 - 05:22 PM

It wasn't deliberate Joe. There was a crash. The public side was recovered fairly easily. (It's just a static copy though.) The real problem has been with the innards - the editing side. Don't ask me what exactly went wrong. But it was catastrophic. Editors haven't been able to edit at all since it happened.


What I still fail to understand is why there isn't anything available to mention this at the submission point: notifications in the editor's forum are all well and good, but the general submitting public doesn't go there.

Even though the pages are static and generated from a backup, it should still be perfectly possible for somebody at AOL to walk onto the site, download a couple select files (main index, at least) and post a notice of some site, rather than leaving the entire thing blind.

Does AOL's new setup have any differences in functionality? (Notifications, etc.), or is it just a rebuild of the underlying structure, to provide greater stability/speed?

Thanks for the update, Jean.

#19 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 06:46 AM

I understand that there is a notice for submitters that the system is temporarily unavailable. There is a link to it in the first post in this thread. You should be redirected to that if you actually try to submit.

I'm not the best person to ask about the details of the new set up, not being a technical type, but greater stability is definitely one aim.

Edited by Jean_Manco, 01 December 2006 - 07:29 AM.


#20 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 08:21 AM

Hi Jean the message you are referring to states:

Service Temporarily Unavailable
We apologize for the inconvenience while we resolve technical problems. Please check back in a day or two.

The one one the forum states;

We do not currently have an ETA for the resolution of the technical difficulties. We will update this announcement when the system is fully functioning again -- please do not start threads asking why the system isn't working properly or when it will be available again. Thanks.

Which one is more accurate ?
TreV

#21 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 09:08 AM

Which one is more accurate ?

The one that says "Okay, now we are not crowing or happy about throwing Rich Skrenta out of the DMOZ community"? :)

Funny what happens to a directory when it rebels against the guy who actually built the system. At the time, I recall several boasts about how many technical whizz-kids they had, and how they really really had no use for Skrenta anymore. Yet here we are. I guess it is all just coincidence. :D

#22 Wit

Wit

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1599 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 09:26 AM

Hmmm, does this mean that somebody has finally entered the dmoz code backdoor and pulled a couple of plugs?

:) :D :D Hmmmmmmmmm.

#23 Guest_joedolson_*

Guest_joedolson_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 December 2006 - 11:02 AM

I understand that there is a notice for submitters that the system is temporarily unavailable. There is a link to it in the first post in this thread. You should be redirected to that if you actually try to submit.


Yes, I'm aware of that - but I still have a problem with it, purely because it's not revealed until after the submission has occurred. I know from experience, that preparing a DMOZ submission is a lot of work: it may not be many words, but you put a lot of thought into each one.

I'm CONFIDENT that most people don't write this down elsewhere, just in case - they write it in the form and then submit. When that form just tells them that the system is down, is all their hard work lost? Even if they did keep their submission information, they've certainly at least wasted the time it took to input the data.

I think that notifying a visitor of a problem with a form only AFTER the form has been submitted is very unfair. If you know that the form won't work, then you should either a) remove the form entirely or B) make a highly visible note, in the form, stating that the form is currently not functioning.

I know it's not your bailiwick to fix this, Jean - it's just stupid that such a simple thing would be ignored by such a major site. It seems like an example of something where a little thought could greatly benefit the public reaction to the problems - but instead of doing it the thoughtful way, they've decided to do it the inconvenient way.

#24 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 11:09 AM

throwing Rich Skrenta out of the DMOZ community


Rich Skrenta wasn't thrown out of the ODP community! You can see him right at the top of this list: http://dmoz.org/edoc/editall.html

Not sure where you heard comments about not needing him, but as far as I know he hasn't actually been involved on the technical side of the ODP since he left AOL. As you know he's been very busy elsewhere.

I admit I'm hazy on the technical stuff, but to the best of my knowledge AOL has assigned a series of engineers to work on the ODP over the years. I couldn't even tell you who was left holding the wreckage after the crash. It was a hardware failure though.

Edited by Jean_Manco, 01 December 2006 - 11:10 AM.


#25 Wit

Wit

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1599 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 11:13 AM

May I link to this:

http://www.threadwatch.org/node/1306

and this:

http://www.threadwatch.org/node/1186

???

#26 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 11:13 AM

it's not revealed until after the submission has occurred.

When I tested it, the notice was coming up as soon as you click "suggest URL".

#27 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 11:24 AM

When I tested it, the notice was coming up as soon as you click "suggest URL".

That's right you have to click several times to find the exact category you want to submit to. Then you get the message you're talking about, when you click "suggest URL". That's not very helpful, why not display it on the "submission instructions page"

TreV

#28 Guest_joedolson_*

Guest_joedolson_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 December 2006 - 02:05 PM

When I tested it, the notice was coming up as soon as you click "suggest URL".


Huh. Well, that's better - although it's not what I saw. Maybe the page was cached...

Still: the earlier the better.

Thanks,
Joe

#29 datpcstore

datpcstore

    Unlurked Energy

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 06 December 2006 - 04:54 PM

http://www.dmoz.org/unavailable.html DMOZ updating site or what?
I have been reading suggestion tips on submitting to DMOZ and still not listed, so now I am prepared to submit to appropriate category and it’s unavailable.

#30 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 08:26 AM

UPDATE

They are stil not accepting submissions - maybe it's time for dmoz editors to find another hobby.

I hate to see people loosing their income at this time of year, ooops sorry I forgot it's voluntary - no money actually changes hands.

#31 Wit

Wit

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1599 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 11:08 AM

At the moment, it kinda looks like AOL can't be arsed to dedicate some "resources" to getting dmoz back on the road.

But I could be wrong.

But if I'm not, then maybe they are working on something more interesting than dmoz. Something like Instant Water (just add 1 cup of water to 1 bag of instant water powder) or pre-licked postage stamps or whatever. :)

#32 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 12:35 PM

AOL & DMOZ
BUSH & BLAIR
LAUREL & HARDY

At least Laurel and Hardy was supposed to be funny

May I take this opportunity to take a “playful swipe” at the small minority of senior DMOZ editors who abuse their “position” in a transparent attempt to raise their own profiles?

For example, I have seen senior DMOZ “editors” pop out of their coffins, to write comments on the blogs of authoritative figures such as Matt Cutts. They begin their contributions by saying “Hi, I’m the DMOZ editor who listed your site”. :) What's that all about ?

Whilst this is not corruption, it’s surely not completely ethical.

Just killing some time whilst I wait to submit my sites :D

TreV

#33 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 04:17 PM

Dear me.

I listed Matt's site. I joked about this when he demonstrated the no-odp tag on his own blog. My post:

But Matt - I thought you liked my description of your blog. I’m hurt, hurt, I tell you. :)

[The ODP editor responsible for that concise, accurate and helpful description.]


Later in that thread I linked to my article Google and Dmoz - Are They in Love.

Is that what you mean by 'raising my profile'? I'm not sure how it was wretched in the first place. But let me explain that I am not an SEO. I am not an internet professional. I work in a completely different field. Neither that article, nor any other page I have online earns me a penny. There is no advertising on my sites. They sell nothing. They are non-commercial, informational sites.

So how are my actions unethical?

Edited by Jean_Manco, 14 December 2006 - 04:19 PM.


#34 sanity

sanity

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6889 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 05:19 PM

I'm also an editor. I do it cause I enjoy it. I certainly don't get anything for it. It's not fair to tar everyone with the same brush.

#35 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:21 PM

Oh Jean,
Sorry; was it you? I’m afraid I only have a faint memory of someone from DMOZ mentioning that they listed his (Matt Cutts) site, and it struck me as odd. It’s small world! You wouldn’t believe the amount of stuff I read in a day, never mind months. :)

So how are my actions unethical?

I’m guessing you are referring to this remark

Whilst this is not corruption in the damming sense of the word, it’s surely not completely ethical.


Since you asked allow me to explain, you have stated:

I am not an SEO. I am not an internet professional. I work in a completely different field.

Then what did you feel you had to contribute to the subject being discussed ?

With respect; that’s like the cleaner who emptied Albert Einstein’s bins “chipping in” on a debate about his theory of relativity.(imho)

Since I stated that I was taking a “playful swipe” I can only assume, I’ve unwittingly touched a raw nerve, for that I apologise unreservedly. :(

Should you require further clarification, don't hesitate to ask. :) I've much more to say on this issue, but I don't want to appear aggressive.

TreV


I'm also an editor. I do it cause I enjoy it. I certainly don't get anything for it. It's not fair to tar everyone with the same brush.


Yes I agree sanity, I wasn't tarring anyone with any brush, you could have knocked me down with a feather when Jean replied to one of my previous posts. I guess it's up to people to draw their own conclusions. My opinions are just that - my opinions.

TreV

#36 Ron Carnell

Ron Carnell

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Invited Users For Labs
  • 2062 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 07:52 PM

With respect; that’s like the cleaner who emptied Albert Einstein’s bins “chipping in” on a debate about his theory of relativity.(imho)

Trust me, if the cleaner was half as smart and insightful as Jean, Albert would have been all ears. :(

One's occupation need not define one's interests. I'm retired, have never done SEO, web design, or marketing for pay ... but I still manage to have an opinion or two from time to time.

#37 sanity

sanity

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6889 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 08:47 PM

:applause: :applause: Ron.

#38 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 09:08 PM

I must admit, I too rather question why an editor pops up to seek credit for adding things to the directory. Its not like another editor wouldn't have done so is it? Did they single-handedly fight a huge editorial decision to list the site when all other editors said that it didn't deserve listing?

No, that was Skrenta wasn't it, and we all know what happened when he did that. :(

Its not you I'm thinking of, Jean, as you turned up to accept the 'blame' if there were any for the way his site was listed in that one specific instance. But excluding Jean, across the span of several years, I've seen a lot of editors use their position to attempt to give themselves an air of importance that, in most of the cases I have seen, is utterly unmerited.

#39 manager

manager

    Time Traveler Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1331 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 10:01 PM

Ron,sanity,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. :)
I have nothing to add, and I stand by my comments
TreV

#40 skrenta

skrenta

    New To Community

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 16 December 2006 - 06:09 PM

I made some public comments about the dmoz outage...

http://www.skrenta.c...sed_up_yet.html



RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users