51 replies to this topic

[Bad Andy Good SEO]

Has anyone else been having trouble connectiing to DMOZ. I've been sick the last couple of days, I started having problems reaching their site last week. I've tried twice today and get the dreaded page cannot be displayed error.

[SearchRank]

Try their mirror site at http://ch.dmoz.org/ if you can't reach the first.

[Bad Andy Good SEO]

Thanks SearchRank that worked great. I knew this was the place to ask!

[SearchRank]

Not a problem. Sometimes DMOZ gets bogged down because Netscape who owns DMOZ puts little to no resources into it.

I believe the mirror site is not quite as fresh as the main site though, like it is a few days behind or something. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong on that but that's what I heard.

[kmtell]

I read somewhere else (this was a couple days ago) from one of the editors that they were having technical difficulties, but were "working to resolve it." That was a response when someone mentioned that they were unable to submit to the directory.

Edited by kmtell, 17 September 2003 - 03:02 PM.

[Chr_Ensslen]

I experienced the same problems today...

[nedguy]

Me too. I've been trying to submit to the main site for over a week. It just locks up or times me out or throws a page not found error.

I've just tried the mirror site. But the same thing. The 'add cgi' routine has simply stalled. Twice.

Just keep trying I guess.

I did manage to get a 'change url' through two weeks ago in which I mentioned that they could replace one with another, so there's an outside chance the submission I want to make will get in, but only if an editor is diligent and goes the extra mile!

Nedguy

[EugeneBarnes]

Any news on the DMOZ front? Seems this problem has been going on for some time now. I'm trying to submit a site today and getting nothing but errors.

[Matt B]

Same here - nothing working past the submit button.

[qwerty]

This was posted by one of their editors on their forum yesterday:

If while looking around the public side you ever see "editors" in the URL, or a reference to port "8081" then it is never going to work. Close the browser, restart, and try again at dmoz.org (not any other subdomain), hit reload or refresh a few times too and see if it makes any difference. One of the public servers keeps getting a problem. If you hit that one then it simply doesn't work. This is being looked into. Several fixes have been applied to the original server bug, but each fix seems to reveal another problem, this being the later incarnation of it. We are well aware of the problem. Editors are not in any position to fix it. Staff are aware of the bug, and once the weather improves, will be back on the job. Expect "resolution within weeks" seems to have been hinted at elsewhere.

[Matt B]

I'm not sure if that's the same problem or not. It just doesn't seem to be accepting any submissions, as they have been timing out every time we attempt for the past few days (weeks). A cgi-bin error is what I usually get.

[mcanerin]

Does anyone actually use DMOZ as a directory? I have managed to submit one (1) site in about 30 tries - the rest failed, not because of my clients site, but because of DMOZ's. I've basically given up on them. Frankly, I'm starting to think it's a very artificial system.

When was the last time anyone said "hmm, I wonder if I can find the site I need at DMOZ..."? How can anyone justify this as being important in terms of page rank or back links?

Yes, I know it IS. But WHY? Real people use Yahoo. Who actually goes to DMOZ to look for stuff? The SOLE reason that I can see to this entity to exist is to provide artificially increased page rank to it's links. Why artificial? because no one uses it! This isn't about a useful site providing a link to another useful site. It seems to fly in the face of usefulness. Since when is a useless site a good reference for anyone?

Half the time I go there it won't even load. Since when is a bunch of hidden or inaccessable links a good neighbourhood? It doesn't matter that they are hidden because Netscape can't keep a website up (huh?), the fact of the matter is that if my site went down all the time my page rank would go down too, and I'd actually drop off the listing for a while until I came back up. Why not here? Is Google being fed a backdoor? If so, tell me why that's different than cloaking.

Maybe I'm wrong, or just in a bad mood - does anyone have anything that may make me change my mind here?

Ian

[Scottie]

Well, DMOZ is also the Google Directory, bear that in mind. I actually look for things there but I doubt I am the average websurfer. In addition to that, lots of sites use the rdf dump on their sites which creates more exposure. I do see a little traffic from sites that use the ODP data, especially for regional/local sites.

It's worth it... if you can get it to work. I've got 4 sites to submit now. Just waiting to see if it will ever work again!

[projectphp]

Does anyone actually use DMOZ as a directory?

If you mean searchers, not many directly, but in the same way Google syndicates results, so does DMOZ, so there are probably a lot of really good links out there, many of which might drive traffic (as Scottie said).

IMHO, though, DMOZ is excellent at what it does. There really isn't a better director, and it is good it is still alive.

Besides that, the simple fact is this: DMOZ doesn't need your site. In all honesty, there are probably at least 5 others just like it already in the index, most far better than yours.

On top of that, who ever writes good, objective descriptions and titles that fulfil the DMOZ guidlines?

Submitting a promotional description rather than an objective, well written description may significantly delay your site from being listed or prevent your site from being listed at all.

Let em repeat that again:

Submitting a promotional description rather than an objective, well written description may significantly delay your site from being listed or prevent your site from being listed at all.

Now, of the 50+ listings waiting to be reviewed, 50+ of them are badly written, innacurate and / or use promotional language like "free" or "best", or both. What do you reckon their chances are of being accepted? Buckleys and none in the short term!!!
some more useful info

Please supply a short and descriptive title.
Always opt for the official name of the site.
Do not use ALL CAPITAL letters.
Exclude promotional language in the title.

So, in short, the problems with DMOZ are annoying, but if the many people who submitted sites started doing a better job, things would go smoother, sites would beaccepted quicker and there would be less complaints. If you want your sitre listed quickly, either become an editor, and work your way up to you relevant category, or try to write really, really good titles and descriptions.

That said, DMOZ is a useful, relevant part of the WWW, noit just from a user perspective, but from a "making sense of all the noise" sense.

Of course, if you can't submit sites at all...

[torka]

Besides that, the simple fact is this: DMOZ doesn't need your site. In all honesty, there are probably at least 5 others just like it already in the index, most far better than yours.

On top of that, who ever writes good, objective descriptions and titles that fulfil the DMOZ guidlines?

Actually, there is NOT ONE other site in DMOZ that covers the same information as the site I'm currently trying to submit. It's the official site for a musical group. Since it's the only official site they've got, it's by definition one of a kind.

The band's official site was previously listed under another URL. Band personnel changes led to that URL being hijacked (long story) and I've tried on several occasions over the course of something like a year and a half to get somebody over there to change the listing to point to the current URL, with a notable lack of success, even when the old (hijacked) URL was pointing to a site that had no band-related content on it at all. So I finally gave up and just started trying to submit the current URL as a totally new listing. Which, of course, hasn't been working either.

Yes, I know DMOZ doesn't need this site. And frankly, we don't really need DMOZ, either. The site is doing well in the SERPs even without a DMOZ listing (and we get most of our referral traffic from a handful of very valuable inbound links, not from the SEs, anyway.) An up-to-date DMOZ link would be nice to have, though. I Just needed to vent because the entire situation is quite frustrating. Thank you all for bearing with me!

As to who writes "quality" guidelines, well... I do. (She said in all modesty...) It really isn't that hard to do.

I've successfully submitted quite a few sites to Zeal, and I learned how over there. Apparently, this makes me a total anomaly, but I'm used to that.

But what's the point? Nobody at DMOZ appears to be looking at the stuff I write anyway, at least not to judge by the action (or lack thereof) taken.

And please don't anyone suggest applying as an editor in this category, even though the DMOZ site says they're looking for an editor there. I'm given to understand that I'd have to supply them with three site suggestions related to the category. Aside from the band's site and the one fan-created site that's already listed, there aren't three other sites that are worth listing, and I refuse to suggest sites I know to be crap in an effort to get the site I'm working with listed. I'm not knowledgeable enough about the next level category up (blues bands starting with the letter "S"), nor do I have enough interest in becoming that knowledgeable, to make applying at that level a worthwhile endeavour.

If I'm going to apply as an editor, I'd like it to be for a category that I'm interested in. No point in signing up if you're not going to work, and no point in doing the work if you're not interested in the topic. That's my philosophy, at least. YMMV.

For how long can a directory remain useful and relevant when its listings are already woefully out of date in some (perhaps many) categories, necessary updates are not made on anything faintly resembling a timely basis, and updates apparently cannot be submitted under any circumstances?

Whoops. Guess I had a little more rant left in me... sorry.

--Torka