Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums

Web Site Design, Usability, SEO & Marketing Discussion and Support

lee.n3o

Dmoz Still Unable To Submit!

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest joedolson

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest joedolson

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

:):D:D Hmmmmmmmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest joedolson

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest joedolson

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,sanity,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. :)

I have nothing to add, and I stand by my comments

TreV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×