Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    416
    Last month, I was at the SIAM Data Mining conference in D.C., where Sergey (Brin) gave a talk on some of the data mining projects going on at Stanford U. around genetics engineering and cancer research, after which there was a Q.A. session about Google (can't think of the google guys going somewhere giving a talk and nobody asking questions about google!)

    I asked him several questions regarding the PageRank, the future of keyword search, and finally about the "monopolizer effect".

    Sergey said that Google is not happy with what's going on at Open Directory. Among the other things, He clearly accepted that there IS a "dmoz effect" in the PageRank, which is unintentionally turning Google against plenty of high quality sites that DMOZ rejects for political reasons.

    The "dmoz effect" is due to google indexing many of the dmoz clones along with Google's own, giving an edge to dmoz-listed sites against non-dmoz-listed sites. (And that's the only dmoz effect).

    What I understood from that short conversation is, that Google might soon be negating the dmoz effect in PageRank and revamping their own web directory. Knowing that the same people (the white men!) who politically influenced dmoz, is also suing Google (that is really a Buffalo Sh*t!), there is a very good chance that dmoz could soon be turned into an uninteresting entity with no substantial value to web traffic.

    What other value does dmoz have to webmasters?

    -BluesX

  2. #2
    ABW Adviser Panel Dynamoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Opposite the Slough of Despond
    Posts
    5,465
    Interesting post BluesX - it's true a DMOZ listing does have a really beneficial effect on your Google PageRank. Even with a "dampener" on the DMOZ effect it should still be useful as the listings tend to pop up in all sorts of places.

    As for the Google web directory - it would be hard to see Google dumping it because a) it's free and b) it's huge. I have a feeling that directories can end up as a huge money pit if you're not careful.

    What *would* be an interesting spin however would be for Google to to use the ODP feed as a basis and merge in their own listings. Customising the directory in such a way wouldn't be technically difficult for an outfit like Google. There are already directories that customise the listings in a similar way.

  3. #3
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,447
    BluesX said...
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Knowing that the same people (the white men!) who politically influenced dmoz<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    While I do somewhat agree with that statement, and being a "white man" myself, I know people who are definitely not the "white men" you refer to, that are just as fraud.

    I have always thought that there is potential for someone at DMOZ to be on the take, especially considering the weight it might have with search rankings/listings. There needs to be a coming together, by all (including us scum, the affiliates), of a better solution to the search rankings/listings.

    My sites are geered to shopping. Most of my descriptions, and titles, indicate clearly that there is something to "buy". The people who come to my site, at least in most cases, are looking to buy. Some are looking for exclusive coupon codes, which I offer through some merchants/advertisers that I have exclusive agreements with. While my sites are not the best when it comes to design, I do make money off my sites, and I do feel that I deserve just as much of a chance at making it as anyone else. The bias toward sites like mine is without warrant. I have no redirects, i.e. Bill Joe Six Pack is searching for "auto parts", comes to my page, and gets redirected to "lingerie". I have no automatic pop-ups upon entry, or exit, and I do not put so much spin on my ads as to leave a false impression. People have brains. If they don't like my site, then they can always hit the "back" button and get the hell out. I don't need the likes of DMOZ making that call as to whether my site has value, or not! To be honest, I would say that as much as 40%-50% of my sites visitors do hit the back button. The rest are shopping! :cool:

    [ 05-19-2002: Message edited by: Big Chuck ]

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    11
    Thanks for the post. Well I hope that something is done as I am sick and tired of DMOZ and the so called EDITORS. I have been trying now for five months to get my sites description changed. I have even voluteered to be an editor but got knocked back.

    I positive that due to the DMOZ lisitng I am not getting as many hits as I should be due to the fact that the word TAXI is not even in the DMOZ description. What can you do when your main product name is not even listed.

    I have sent in a number of requests and have taken advice from others but nothing has happened at all.

    If any DMOZ editors is reading this then please help me.


    regards John

  5. #5
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    "What other value does dmoz have to webmasters?~BluesX"

    To me? Zip, zilch, and nada!!

    I wouldn't miss the Commie Directory...

  6. #6
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    416
    Big Chuck:

    About the "white men" deal, LOOK HERE I agree that white men may indeed be black or red or brown, may even be women.

    Dynamoo,

    I only said what I understood would be happening at Google from what I heard from its founder. In fact, Google has tools to build a bigger directory -from ground up- using its index, trend tracker, keyword inventory and search activity logs. I think if they solve the auto-maintenance issue, Google just might pop-up the best web directory out there!

    John,

    Do not worry. DMOZ is a piece of junk and it does not matter how they describe your site or vene *if* they decribe your site at all. Right now, dealing with dmoz is pretty much same thing as dealing with the "republican party".. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img] (draw your own conclusions)

    Leader:

    I *did* say that ELSEWHERE that that is exactly what I think!

    -BluesX

  7. #7
    ABW Adviser Panel Dynamoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Opposite the Slough of Despond
    Posts
    5,465
    Google is always full of suprises but up against several thousand active editors doing a good job (and there are some great editors at DMOZ) it's hard to see how they could do it. DMOZ listings are widely recycled via Inktomi too.

    Let's be blunt though - a directory or portal's importance only remains as long as it serves some use to the VISITOR. AltaVista got blasted out of the water by Google because Google gave better results. Before that it was the Webcrawler being beaten to a pulp by AltaVista. Yahoo has been around for a while but the directory is not its strong point any more (indeed Yahoo is sort of the anti-Google in terms of useless added features).

    The bottom line is this - portals and search engines come and go. What was once important is no more - I don't give a stuff about AltaVista or the Webcrawler these days - but anywhere that generates traffic is important to us webmasters. If Google creates the world's best directory then that's great [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

    I do wonder though that some people seem to have an ENORMOUS chip on their shoulder about DMOZ and wish it out of existence. Would you really prefer a creaky old directory like Yahoo's or a scumware supported portal like LookSmart?

  8. #8
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    416
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
    (and there are some great editors at DMOZ)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Almost ALL DMOZ editors become editors to get THEIR sites in. I wouldn't think there are ANY DMOZ editor who actually cares about building a *beautiful* web directory! Nor any of the dmoz editors read the "Making short commentaries about websites - 101" textbook.. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

    There is NO quality that exist in DMOZ. Though it is free, and Google uses it, it possess some value to traffic distribution.

    -BluesX

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    153
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Almost ALL DMOZ editors become editors to get THEIR sites in. I wouldn't think there are ANY DMOZ editor who actually cares about building a *beautiful* web directory! Nor any of the dmoz editors read the "Making short commentaries about websites - 101" textbook.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Well... Nothing like a bold, sweeping, generalizing perpetuation of a stereotype to get the blood boiling.

    Saves on coffee I guess. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]


    Lets just stop for one second here. I'm not going to defend DMOZ because (due to its sheer size) statisticly there has to be truth somewhere for every single statement made about them.

    There are several people who inhabit ABW who are editors in DMOZ who are good people. There are several people who inhabit ABW that really hate DMOZ who are good people. So I guess both sides are right and both sides are wrong.

    Obviously DMOZ should compromise and create a section dedicated to affiliate sites. This would solve many problems within and without. Shopping is shopping and people like it. -------
    Whether they will or not is another matter entirely.

    There are bottlenecks within DMOZ where elitists or snobs or opportunistic monopolizers have an iron grip.

    An orphan category I just took over had three seperate deeplinks to a luxury watch company in it and the category has nothing to do with that at all. I doesn't take much thought to figure out how that happened. No one took over the category after whomever abandoned it. There it sat until I got it. Needless to say those links are gone now.

    Wonder why I did that?

  10. #10
    ABW Adviser Panel Dynamoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Opposite the Slough of Despond
    Posts
    5,465
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Well... Nothing like a bold, sweeping, generalizing perpetuation of a stereotype to get the blood boiling.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Yes I'm definitely getting the impression that BluesX enjoys a bit of trolling to keep the boards interesting [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

  11. #11
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,650
    Regarding DMOZ and affiliate sites: I don't agree that they should set up a separate section for affiliate sites. There's way too much variation in our content for that.

    I think the only kind of "affiliate pages" that DMOZ should reject automatically is the "self-replicating" kind where if you sign up for this or that program you get "your own customized site" (whoop-de-doo) to promote.

    Everything else should be categorized according to what it's actually about, and knee-jerk rejection of affiliate links should not be the dominant factor in determining a site's fate. Not unless they are prepared to reject all sites that carry ANY form of advertising!

    On a different note: I've been messing around with "start page exchanges" in the last few days, and I've seen some truly dreadful pages. I almost didn't know there was stuff out there that bad!

    Elisabeth Archambault

  12. #12
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    West Coast USA
    Posts
    3,043
    >I almost didn't know there was stuff out there that bad!

    I was searching Yahoo!.
    Doing some research on a keyword set.
    Had not been to Yahoo! in a year.

    Sites with title begining with #
    404s
    ***JUNK*** sites.
    I just don't think anyone cares!

  13. #13
    ABW Ambassador qball0213's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,158
    The thing with DMOZ is, everyone always says apply to be an editor to help, etc, I have applied on three or four seperate occasions and never heard a thing back, and yes the last two or three were small categories, etc, we've all heard it before. What they should do is, the main editor should assign someone applying to be an editor to a category, and not allow the applicant to pick his category. This would do atleast two things, it would weed out the ones just applying to get their sites in, and it would weed out the ones who really want to be an editor or not. Oh and they should kick all of those guys who act like they know everything just because they are editors, such as some of those guys at searchengineforums.com, just to make us feel better, hehe.

  14. #14
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    352
    BluesX,

    Maybe if you had a decent site that offered content you would get into Dmoz. It seems to me you are just an affiliate link farmer that always seems to be in a draught caused by someone else other than yourself. What ever happened to your publishersvoice.com? That could have been a good content site but I guess it would have meant writing content instead of just pasting some affliate links.

    Damn can I troll or what?

  15. #15
    ABW Ambassador Abigail's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Fraser Valley, BC Canada
    Posts
    1,100
    I took a stroll through DMOZ this a.m., I haven't visited for about 2 weeks. I have had about 30 pages up in there data base for almost 2 years - Strange thing, they have changed the titles on almost all of my pages in the past 2 weeks - Interesting, what?! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif[/img]

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    153
    Trolling...

    I read the description posted because I hoped that once and for all I could figure out why someone would do something like that. Well, still no idea.

    There must be some fascinating psychological theory behind such behavior but I'm not a big psychology fan. Oh well.

    Now let me tell you what I think about psychology fans!!!! :mad: :mad:

    Just kidding.

    ***crawls back under the bridge***

  17. #17
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    416
    >Maybe if you had a decent site that offered content

    How stupid of you......

    How many times do I have to say that I am NOT a PUBLISHER? Publisher, as a concept, has no place in affiliate marketing world where action is money.

    If you are a publisher, you would sell your billboards to advertisers and make money. If you are a publisher, all you care is to reach out to masses who will read your articles! If you are a publisher, you do not care if people who see the ads on your billboard will buy anything today (or within X number of days without clicking on anybody else's billboard ad) or ever, as long as the advertiser is willing to pay you, no matter what.

    Now I am NO Publisher, You are no publisher, Haiko is no publisher. None of the others are no publishers. What would I care about content? What content? Put up a little BS article on a little BS site and call it content? Oh yeah, do it over and over again to make thousand of little BS sites with only litle BS articles on them with no intellectual value whatsoever and that is content?

    Yeah tell that to Leader!

    Who is to decide what is content and what is not and who gives a rats ass? Who are you Dynamoo to say that my sites have no content? What the f**k do your site have? Your BS**itting around articles as valuable content? MUuuahhahahhha Muahahhahahhahah AAhahhahahhahahhahahh AHHAhahahhahhahhahhaha

    Screw DMOZ. I don't give a f**k what they think web should be? Yeah they probably think there should only be NEWS channel on TV with no advertisements in between news stories!

    Muuuahhahhahhahhhahhahha Muuuahhahahhhahhhahha Muahhahhahhahahhahahhhhahahah

    Man this is so entertaining. I am just glad I am wiser than most others!

    -BluesX

  18. #18
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    352
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Who are you Dynamoo to say that my sites have no content? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Come on give me credit where credit is deserved. It was me not Dynamoo.

    YHBT. YHL. HAND

    Look it up.

  19. #19
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    416
    >Give me credit...

    Oh... in such an agony, I mixed the handles!.. Take all the credit you wish for.. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

    -BluesX

  20. #20
    ABW Adviser Panel Dynamoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Opposite the Slough of Despond
    Posts
    5,465
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Screw DMOZ. I don't give a f**k what they think web should be? Yeah they probably think there should only be NEWS channel on TV with no advertisements in between news stories!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Actually that would be Channel 125 on my TV (BBC News 24).

    Calm down BluesX [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img] Lots of people run successful affiliate sites without being listed in DMOZ. It's a political issue for DMOZ which is well within its rights to choose what to list and what not to. I'm not saying I agree with DMOZ's stance on affiliate sites though.

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    153
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>That would be me..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Then what is the problem?

  22. #22
    ABW Adviser Panel Dynamoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Opposite the Slough of Despond
    Posts
    5,465
    I think you do have a point BluesX, it must have crossed Google's mind to do something with the directory, but as I said they could modify the ODP feed with their own data - adding listings (maybe even paid-for) removing sites that have gone etc etc - I think Google has the technology to do great things with the data (let's be honest, the Google directory is better than the raw ODP anyway because of the incorporate of PageRank).

    But.. building a directory from scratch is likely to be a money pit and I don't think they'd do it.

    About Yahoo! being listed on the ODP - yeah, it might well get rejected if it wasn't Yahoo! - there *are* affiliate sites in there but they tend to be the blue-chip shopping mall type ones that add "price comparisons" or "product reviews". It does seem that the big players are treated differently from the little ones.

  23. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. DMOZ
    By Steveinid in forum Midnight Cafe'
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: May 19th, 2003, 06:16 AM
  2. R.I.P. DMOZ
    By T-Bone in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 5th, 2002, 11:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •