Dear Google (If you're reading)

Just an opinion, but one that is being shared more and more by online
buyers.

Using Open Directory Project for the Google directory is no longer
working, and hasn't worked for quite some time. For instance, I search
for and buy vintage costume jewelry. Open directory has added no new
sites for this category, and many others, for a long time now.

One reason is because the group seems to be more oriented toward the
group's and its volunteers' priorities rather than serving the
internet community, and certain editors actually admit this in their
forum. They recently have closed their forum to inquiries from people
who have gone to the trouble to suggest sites with relevant content.
Their reasoning is "Its not useful for Open Directory to answer these
inquiries." Try going to the forum and asking why your favorite site
has not been added, and see what happens.

Do they need help? Many, including myself, have tried to help by
applying as editors for the directory (it's volunteer work.) I applied
weeks ago, and have not even received the courtesy of a reply. Many
others have applied as well, with negative results. It seems as though
the original group has become cultish. They seem to have a distaste,
especially, for shopping sites. Webmasters who criticize them for it
are mocked, verbally abused and threatened with punishment.

As a result, the Google Directory has become practically useless for
many. For instance, I can't find the latest popular styles in vintage
jewelry on their lists of such sites. I can't find sites for Rockabilly
or Boho jewelry, 1960s Mod, or 1970s chain jewelry in the Google
Directory. Of course, the Google search engine is fine, so why have a
directory at all?

Of course, the Google search engine works well, but searchers have to
go through a lot of dross; for instance, eBay is usually at the top of
the search pages, and their links only direct the buyer to the eBay
search engine. Most serious jewelry collectors don't want anything to
do with eBay.

If there are good reasons for having a directory, please consider a
different directory, one which is free and which those who run it are
busy posting relevant content for online shoppers. How about the
up-and-coming Zeal.com?

Best,

Rebecca

Rebecca has summarised the problem extremely well. We at
www.silverstall.com have suffered at the mercy of DMOz editors who do
not list our site for the simple reason it competes with their own
commercial interests.

Wow--Nice site silverstall--

Another illustration of the problem--this site has loads of currently
popular jewelry trends, though not vintage, there are hoop earrings,
boho stuff, etc. Try searching for any of that in the Google Directory
(Open Directory at DMOZ).

Best,
Rebecca

What is unique about that site? What makes it different to other sites
already listed in the category? DMOZ lists unique content and not all
sites in a category.

Be careful making allegations about competing editors - the site has
been deleted twice by two diffewrent editors as not having unique
content and the editor that did so did not have a site that competes
with it.

DMOZ directories are top down and aristocratically organized
directories where editors behave like little Renaissance princes and
think they aren't accountable against nobody, no webmasters and no
customers. They do not even think in terms of CRM.
They are just representatives of an outdated web 1.0 oligarchy that
doesn't deserve any particular attention anymore.
Webrings are bottom up and democratically organized directories with a
navbar, a code (sometimes called SSNB) that is a small piece of
JavaScript (or HTML) that allows the surfer to click on a link to
travel to the next, previous, or a random site. Webring masters
interact with each applicant for a registration in a propre and correct
way. Each applicant of a webring directory gets his webringmail and can
subscribe to several webrings that share the ideas and affinities of
his ring. http://dir.webring.com/rw

'Be careful making allegations about competing editors - the site has
been deleted twice by two diffewrent editors as not having unique
content and the editor that did so did not have a site that competes
with it.'

I apologise this reply was not clealry written.

when i said 'we had suffered at the hands of ...' I was not actually
referring to the silverstall site but another business site started by
a group of ex-marines. Therefore what site has been deleted twice? if
it is www.silverstall.com then that is interesting because firtsly
no-one has told us and secondly we never applied as we have strong
views about the ethics and practices of DMOZ. In any event who is the
editor? and how do you know he or she did not have a site that competes

with it?

Uh oh, a guardian from the DMOZ cult.

Hey, Seo! It doesn't matter to shoppers that a site is unique, and it
doesn't matter if shopping sites are unique--what shoppers want is the
diversity that comes with fresh new content. The jewelry sites now on
the directory are old hat carrying the same old stuff, nothing
particularly stylish because nothing new has been added for ages.
Searchers and shoppers don't care about the self-important goals of
DMOZ and their editors. We want the latest information.

That's why Google should drop the Open Directory Project and use
something new, a directory just as careful to keep pyramid schemes and
affiliate sites out, but anxious to truly serve the searching and
shopping community. Editors who map out their own goals are thinking
about themselves, not about those in search of info and products.

I encourage people to go to the DMOZ forum at:
http://resource-zone.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9

Check out a number of the people who get slapped down with smarty-pants
answers--and how the editor's attitudes towards others show why DMOZ is
no longer viable to be used as the Google directory. Whoever is
ultimately in charge of the directory at Google should ask
him/herself--Is this organization really of service to the public
coming to Google, shoppers as well as webmasters?

Best,

Rebecca

Oh, and go to http://resource-zone.com/forum/ and check out especially
these threads "Site submission category" and "Delays on URL submissions
and payments to expedite, " and see how DMOZ "editors" react so
religiously to the slightest criticism.

There's another thread on the second page that you can find here:

http://resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42340

That's a post where the Grand Moderator, Hucheson, judges a webmaster
(an intelligent, experienced guy who has volunteered and been rejected
as an editor) as being in need of psychological help for thinking his
site should be listed on Open Directory:

"THAT problem is perception, not reality. People who think DMOZ is the
bottleneck toward commercial promotion are just delusional -- afflicted
with mental deficiences (her misspelling) so serious that they can't
handle the facts: that is, all those myriads of commercially promoted
sites that AREN'T listed in the ODP!
People like that have problems....the solution (for webmasters of
shopping sites) is psychological help, not trying to transform reality
to fit such seriously antisocial and irrational delusions....."

Hucheson, who hates shopping sites, has posted about 500 posts of the
same thing pseudo philosophical babble amounting to "We don't have to
do anything," over and over and over, often accompanied by insults.

As you read further in the thread, you will see why only a few sassy
posts from the public can be found, with mainly the groveling posts
still there--several moderators, motsa, brmehlman, and Nivik23 -- brag
about how they delete posts for criticizing lazy editors.
Makes you wonder why she spends so much time doling out slaps to the
public that could be better spent evaluating and listing new web sites.
Makes you wonder why DMOZ rejects so many editors who could help.
Although I think DMOZ and the Open Directory Project has become a cult
and are beyond help.

Best,

Rebecca

"The Open Directory Project thoroughly approves of free speech.
Provided that it happens somewhere else"
jdaw1

Who the hell cares if your site wasn't added to DMOZ? I only use ODP
for specific topics. For everything else, I use Google.
If you have a shopping site, I'd be more concerned with getting your
catalog into Froogle than Google Directory.

I have the same problem with DMOZ but in a leisure context. I've been
trying to get the UK Audi Quattro Owners Club site delisted in favour
of the UK Quattro Forum for over a year - the former site is now
morubund but achieves top listings because of its DMOZ entry. This
doesn't help anyone.

Sites are http://www.quattroownersclub.com and
http://www.quattroforum.com - visitthem and you can see how busy the
latter one is compared with the former - but DMOZ is a brick wall.