jlfjeep

From what I can tell your site has not been reviewed yet (if its the one in your signature).

Real estate is not an area I am familar with, but its is a very spam prone area and editors are kept busy dealing with that (blame your fellow realtors for the tactics the use to get multiple spam listings rather than DMOZ).

If you have been told at resouce-zone that the site is waiting, there is nothing more you can do (DON'T resubmit) - there is no help anyone can give you. See my message above on how to get listed.

CBP

I think a fair question would also be, why are so many people upset with dmoz.

It might make a good poll. Or perhaps it should be dmoz powers-that-be asking themselves, so that good editors don't feel the need to go solo in defending the rest, like swatting at flies with a frying pan. Just a suggestion.

Don't forget it is the webmasters that are unhappy, not the DMOZ user (customer). DMOZ is building a directory for the user. I have never ever seen a DMOZ user complain.

That is frustrating - but we have been around this so may times before and everyone gets tired of it ... I guess responding here is taking editors away from editing .... but what a one way thread it would be if that did not happen.

Always happy to help when comments are constructive.

CBP

As a customer I can always look elsewhere, and often do. I prefer directories these days for regular searches for simple things, but you need an SE for anything stranger.

__________________
Simon - Biogas, Rauchgasanalysator and Rauchgasanalysegerät

It is sad but true that Google is still pulling their top search listings from DMOZ, at least in our category of "HGH", every listing on the first page is in DMOZ.

Our web site hgh-pro.com has been very popular in all search engines since early 1999, it was even listed in DMOZ, but as soon as our category got an editor our site was immediately removed, and for no reason, and we never received an e-mail.

I have submitted this site several other times throughout the years, about once a year, and I have never even received a response.

Later, I found out that the editor for the HGH categories is selling an HGH product himself, and so he will not approve any web sites that pose any competiton, and he won't even provide us with an explanation.

After our main site was dropped, somehow our other web site appeared in the same category. This is a site that is not advertised, has no pagerank and so doesn't pose him any competiton.
Since we do have this one site in the homeopathic HGH category, we have twice now asked for the URL to be changed to our main site URL for our listing, but again, we have received no response, and our URL has not been changed.

We would like to have our best web site represent our product in DMOZ, but it is obvious that the editor does not want our best site, which contains over 100 pages of information, and is also managed by a registered nurse of 21 years, to be in DMOZ. Obviously the editor is keeping our popular web site out on purpose, because he is selling a competitor product, and he knows that if he places our site in DMOZ it will then rank well in Google!

I am surprised that Google is still placing so much weight on being listed in DMOZ because in doing so they are allowing these prejudiced editors to control Google's listings, and so Google search is missing the best HGH web sites.

Our main web site ranks well in all search engines except Google, and I know the reason is because the DMOZ editor will not allow our main web site to be listed. In reading the posts here, I have read this over and over. Many others are having the same problem with the editor of their category.

At least some of you have received replys and explanations about being rejected. Our main site was dropped for no reason and the few times I have submitted again, I have yet to receive a response.

I agree with most sentiments in this thread. I actually used to be a DMOZ editor 5-6 years ago.

About a year or so ago I tried to sign up for some different areas that were asking for editors and each time I was rejected with some lame standard verbiage DMOZ sends out to applicants.

Some of my early sites are listed in DMOZ, but I can't point to any sites that are fairly new that have been listed.

I've got several directory sites utilizing some great software that make my job very easy when I approve / disapprove a listing. I can't believe that any DMOZ editor is that busy that it takes years to approve a site.

If you look at most categories in DMOZ, they are fairly small when compared to a major search engine. Does it really take 90 days or more to approve a listing.

Maybe DMOZ should develop an express submission process in which they charge a small fee to help cover costs.

They should do something innovative or go away.

__________________
FREE Web Pages
Dallas Yellow Pages

I personally like DMOZ, and use it frequently for finding new sites and information when doing research. Occasionally I'll end up going to a site that is no longer there or is useless, but usually I find what I'm looking for.

The opinions in this thread are naturally going to be nearly all from those who don't like DMOZ, because most of the people reading or posting here are either in the SEO business, or have a website that needs more traffic.

If your web site is a really good, useful site, it is probably already listed in DMOZ, or gets plenty of links from other sites, so the site owner is not here doing research on getting more traffic, and they have no need to hire an SEO firm.

On the other hand, if you've built a new site and you're trying to make money off of it, you've probably hired an SEO firm or you are here doing research trying to figure out how to get more traffic.

Well it seems that DMOZ wants the good sites in their directory, and could care less about the sites that are trying to get in. And as a DMOZ user, I think that's the way it should be.

In fact it would seem that the fact that someone is trying so hard to get into DMOZ means their site isn't all that great, since they aren't getting enough traffic from other sources.

I really don't think it's all that bad if it takes a few years to get into DMOZ. So many companies start up and go out of business, and so many sites come up for a while and then disappear. If getting into DMOZ takes a few years for some categories, that will just weed out all the sites and businesses that weren't even capable of staying alive that long.

Sure, SEO firms don't like it because they need to get immediate results for their clients. But as a DMOZ user, I am almost always satisfied with the results DMOZ gives me. And if I don't find what I'm looking for, I go to a search engine and try my luck with them.

It could be argued that the more SEO firms and webmasters hate DMOZ, the better job it is doing at keeping their garbage out of their directory. Sure, a few really useful sites get left out and some crap gets in. But in the end is it useful for users? To me it is.

hgh-pro
Yours is the type of site that DMOZ does not list. Please stop submitting and spamming DMOZ.
If you want more information, pleasego to www.resource-zone.com and ask there

What was the response when you reported this abuse in the correct place? or are you just jumping to conclusions so you add to the DMOZ bashing and whingeing?

CBP

At the risk of sounding like I'm sucking-up, *yes* I'm tired of the bashing. I'm not a DMOZ editor, and probably never will be. But, I've spent a fair amount of time in the resource-zone, and have come to understand ODP reasonably well.

It is a project with a very respectable social goal, but obviously the project has been overrun by spam and affiliate site submissions. This is what has destroyed the submission process for us all.

From what I see at the forum, it is clear that very few editors even look at the submission list because it is now like my 8 year old email box. . . nothing but spam. So, editors are doing what editors are supposed to do, find good sites on their own and list them.

If it’s any consolation, webmasters would be wise to submit and forget it. If their site is in fact content rich and at least somewhat unique, it will one day be discovered by an editor and listed.

Like everyone else, I’m ticked that my competitors are listed, and I’m not. I’m also upset that the Looksmart directory is closed to submissions. Between the two, I’m out probably 100 -200 valuable links. Is it fair? No. But that’s life. So, I work everyday at getting at least two new links. In 3 months, I’ve replaced what I would have received from ODP and Looksmart. What else can you do?

If I can restate one point: the reason few editors work on submissions is *spam and affiliate site* submissions. So blame the web-marketeers who have bombed the submission process, not the people who refuse to wade through the garbage.

/*tom*/

I recently spent 3 hours on a Sunday morning while the wife washed the car clearing a backlog of 80 sites to a category - I only listed 2 of them ---- 3 hours work to list 2 sites!!!! - I then spent 10 minutes searching Google to find 3 really good sites to list in the category.

Ecitors are not there to process submissions, they are there to build a category of resources. The pool of submitted sites is such a waste of an editors time.

...at least the car got washed :-)

CBP

We have never spammed DMOZ, if so we would not have been listed in the first place, and have you looked at the sites you do have listed?

How many times to how many catgeories have you submitted?

Its called spam when you submit so many times to so many categories.

Its keeps editor busy, so they can not get on and deal with the sites that deserve a listing (see tcampione's message)

CBP

I think it works better in the German language sections. I have three sites listed. The German one was listed within a couple of weeks, but that might be a coincidence. There are just too many English speakers out there. There is nothing wrong with submissions, and I find it wrong that no answer is sent when a site is refused. It dows not have to be an explanation or apology. I have been refused in other directories, I just accept the fact that I am not what they are looking for. A lot of the time I do not submit to a directory that does not have a completely suitable category. Nobody is going to search for flue gas analysers under "lingerie" when they are sober, and if they are that drunk they will have forgotten in the morning anyway.

__________________
Simon - Biogas, Rauchgasanalysator and Rauchgasanalysegerät

First of all, this outfit is NOT independent - it belongs to Netscape - the fact they carefully conseal.
When I attempted to get our site listed, they messed up and put it in a wrong directory. Emails to editor remained unanswered, so I started looking for clues on how to reach this gestapo-like organization.
At one point, they had a message in my directory stating that they needed an editor. I applied, and was not accepted without any explanations. I have a degree in Computer Science and in the area related to that particular directory... They never specify what their requirements are, never give a reason for denial - what's up with that, and how can they claim their impatiality and independence.
Recently, we wanted to change our main domain, and I contacted the editor asking to update the listing - no response or other reaction whatsoever. At this point, we are forced to have two identical sites which clatters the Web, and technically is not quite ethical - and these people claim to be some kind of Internet Guardian and an ultimate standard of legitimacy.

It has nothing to do with whether or not you email the editor; I submitted a site I designed for a client and in over a month still had not heard back or seen it listed, so I emailed the editor.

She responded to my email, promising to have the site indexed within a week, providing it met requirements (which it did; I read their "standards" thoroughly before submitting)

The site had still not been listed in two weeks so I emailed the editor AGAIN, and again received a response that the site would indeed be indexed.

It has been over four months now and still no listing. Perhaps if the editors were not volunteers, this could be remedied, but major search engines and consumers alike should not rely on DMOZ's accuracy. Excellent sites are being denied access for apparently no reason.

brian mcdonald
Quote:
i contact dmoz and was told there was nothing i could do to "prove" copyright infringement and as such there was no chance they would remove the offending site from their director


Which is right. How is DMOZ supposed to know which is the copy? Your competitor could be saying the same thing about you. I am sure the site will get dumped if there is some sort of legal proof. You need to pursue other avenues re the copyright and not blame DMOZ.

i provided links to the other guys website on Archive.org which show his website from it's earliest inception. A very cursory examination of that site will demonstrate my point very clearly. there is also no way i could have "influenced" the archive into showing fraudulent data to support me. getting legal proof will cost me 4 years approximately and well over a hundred thousand dollars. even then how do i "prove" to dmoz satisfaction the judgement is "real".

from my perspective dmoz is helping someone profit from their theft of my design work so pardon me if i feel a tad put upon.

In most of the categories I edit, new suggested sites re lsited or rejceted (most rejected) within 12 hours of being submitted - I check in 2x a day. - it did tae a long time to get rid of the initial backlog.

There are some categories where I do not do this as they are being developed.

That is probably never gong to happen It will make it easier for the spammer to stay under the radar scope. The minute they know they are rejected, they can tr again witha new tactic ... from an editors point of view, its better to keep them guessing if they have been caught.

Again - it would be a good service for the legitimate webmaster, but it would too helpful for those trying it on .... don't blame DMOZ for the problems created by these people.

CBP

Why is so much rubbish being spread in this thread.

It is not being concealed !!!!

There a copyright to netscape on the front page. After you submit a site, there are comments about signing things over to netscape. Its in the FAQ's. Its in the guidelines.

Where do you get the rubbish from that its carefully concealed? Why spread what is not true?

Why did you contact the editor? Did you follow the guidlines about what to do when you want to change a URL? Or are you just using this to bash DMOZ?

BTW - at the top of the DMOZ page is a <update URL> function!!!! (that does not mean DMOZ will doit unless it complies with the guidelines)

CBP

brain

There are oher avenues for you to pursue against this site. eg the DMCA. We have had threads here on this. I am sure DMOZ will remove the site if the appropriate legal avenues are followed. DMOZ can not be the "judge" of these kinds of issues.

HOWEVER, I will raise your issue internally to see what happens.

CBP

Editors are encouraged NOT to respond to submitter emails.

If you are wondering about the sites status, as has been mentioned several times in this thread, so to the DMOZ forum and ask

CBP

... and once you've cleared the spam and affiliate sites you have to work through all the sites submitted to the wrong category, sites submitted in the wrong language, duplicate website applications (with an alternative domain name).
Then it's time to check the added value of the website, correct (or reject) the stupid titles and descriptions that people think up (Read the Guidelines !!!!!!).

Many DMOZ editors do not enter into email conversations about rejected websites a. because it's very time consuming, b, because of the abuse hurled by DMOZ-spammers and outrage from the rule-breakers and rule-ignorers.
Just as you don't reply to spam emails (you don't reply to them do you?) a DMOZ editor is unlikely reply to blatently invalid applications.
I have personally been threatened with physical violence by an affiliate website proporting to represent a Christian boys club in NY,NY.

By the way, many editors have in interest in their groups, otherwise they wouldn't be doing the volountary work. There are rules, which are enforced, to prevent mis-use of that interest for commercial purposes. Valid and honest reports of abuse are followed up and action is taken.

Harrassing an editor is a good way to get your website ignored.

Have they been red tagged for a permanent ban?

CBP

CRich your credibility just dropped a few pegs for this bullshit... here's why.

I spent a year moderating here at WebProWorld. I accepted the position because I thought this new venue has the resources to become a leader in "e" knowledge sharing, and wanted to be associated with such a venue to add my voice to theirs.

Not long ago I disagreed with a WebProWorld Administration decision to request for another moderator's resignation because a few members here cared less about the rules, and decided it was "so easy" to harrass that moderator...

rather than banning these members for obvious ill-will, WebProWorld decided to ignore the long standing support they received from a dedicated & loyal person in favor of less than professional slugs that think it is professional to re-dress private matters in public.

To bring this closer to home and your thread starter... I have a ton of information about inside discussions that went on inside WebProWorld and if I started posting these at other venues where WebProWorld has zero control over such dialogue - would you call this:

1. Newsworthy

2. Professional, and

3. A factual record of event that need public discussions?

Regardless of the event - most often public discussions of internal matters for any organization is an attempt to "get even"... not because an outcast is right or wrong - just because they can and it makes them feel "in control".

Please delete this thread... it isn't newsworthy what-so-ever and whether intentional or unintentional it promotes unprofessional conduct.

__________________
New daily advice on Advance SEO, Copyright & DMCA @ Twitter

Hi Everyone. My first post.
It's getting to the stage that the DMOZ editors practically have a license to control the Internet as far as competition is concerned. Literally!!
One of the main culprits in my opinion is the GOOGLE BACKLINKS thing. If these editors build huge networks of sites on different IP addresses and allow them all to be indexed in DMOZ that gives them a massive advantage over the rest, especially when they have the correct linking strategy. FACT!
My main competitor is the editor for my subject and I ain't got a cat in hells chance of getting listed.
I've worked my socks off creating a very useful website and it shows all over Yahoo and all the others. It shows in bits on Google but with the conning DMOZ editors and Google backlinks thing I'm afraid no one will be able to compete against these "people" on the Internet. However, I am in a fortunate position that I can promote my website in the businesses and area I promote so I can corner a good chunk of the market that way!
My opinion is Google and DMOZ have created a very unsightly monster for all webmasters and they are biting big chunks out of the hands that feed them coz they're losing control of the whole situation!
What's the saying "Don't bite the hand that feeds you" This is the Internet and the word spreads quickly!

cbp,
Glad I could provide some inspiration. And I hope you indeed can help with those areas. I have been following the Rec/Models area for the past few years and have seen few changes (but I admit I am not looking daily).

Keep up the good work.

Jim

__________________
Jim Starkweather
Webmaster - Armorama.com

Rubbish.

Rubbish.
You come up with the evidence and it will be dealt with.

CBP

Sure sounds like the problem resides with Google - don't it!

DMOZ isn't about commercialism - Google is.

__________________
New daily advice on Advance SEO, Copyright & DMCA @ Twitter

A double "Rubbish" cbp.

I don't think I've ever spoke that strongly! :-)

__________________
New daily advice on Advance SEO, Copyright & DMCA @ Twitter

I learnt from the best :-)

I think if I lower the tone anymore I may have to lock the thread :-) .... its not going anywhere.

CBP

I seem to be hearing the sound of an axe grinding. It may just be the A/C unit though.

While this post is not newsworthy. I think it is still "post"worthy. I mean really? Have you been reading the articles on this site in the past year? They are all based on this type of "farmed" info or calls with people at Google.

And while I am on it...What happened to Brittany dammit! :)

Jim

__________________
Jim Starkweather
Webmaster - Armorama.com

I think the orginal problem is the use of the word "Open" in the title and newsletter.
The "Open" does not mean that DMOZ is open for listings.
The "Open" means that the directory is avalable for use by others (eg Google, AOL, etc) following the philiosphy of the open source software movement.
Many posters in the thread have got this fact wrong.

It has also perpeuated the myth about what DMOZ is not - its not free listing service.

DMOZ whingeing is not constructive.

CBP

Perhaps this attitude could answer the previous question of why do people care so much about DMOZ? Maybe they are simply annoyed at all the time they've wasted submitting to a site whose editors freely admit that they ignore submissions and that the whole process is a waste of time. If you disagree with the rules, stop being an editor. If you continue to be an editor, try actually reviewing the sites that people have submitted. We expect editors to review submissions to the best of their abilities. The above statement is typical of the arrogance frequently demonstrated on the DMOZ forum. The DMOZ site gives the impression that submissions will be reviewed as soon as possible. If submissions are not being reviewed, why have the facility? Why allow us to waste our time in submitting and monitoring our sites when many are unlikely to even be looked at? The whole process is badly thought out and ill-managed. DMOZ needs to make its mind up what the hell it's there for, then it needs to get a grip on its editors and get them do their job, not their interpretation of it.

You have a major misunderstanding of DMOZ.

An editors job is not to review sites. An editors job is to build a category of resources - reviewing submitted sites is just one of many sources editers use. The submitted sites is the worse source of new sites for an editor. It is really an inefficient use of an editors time.

Other direcories have a free and paid listing service. Obviously you are looking for a free listing service from DMOZ. As
DMOZ does not provide this service, can I suggest you go elsewhere.

Exactly - I think it should be removed.

The perid of greatest growth at DMOZ was in the later part of last year when there were technical problems preventing sites being submitted.

Yet DMOZ is by far the largest Directory out there and no other Directory comes close. It is the fastest growing directory out there and no other dirctory comes close ... just don't figure that it does this by being ill-managed.

Who said sites are not being reviewed? Why are you bothering to monitor it. The standard advice is submit and forget ... move on.

DMOZ has done that .... its is trying to build a category of resources on a topic ...

Maybe because we have to deal with so many who expect something for nothing and have a major misuderstanding about what DMOZ is about. We have do deal with people who would rather whinge ad bash than be constructive. Most of the "arrogance" over at resource zone is directed at those that do not follow the guidelnes or did not get the answer that they wanted. Wouldn't you be frustrated and arrogant when having to deal with fools?

Its is obvious from your post, that your whinge is based on you not understanding DMOZ and DMOZ not meeting YOUR service expectations - in that case, I suggest to request arefund .... oh, hang on a minute, its free!!!

Why not contribute something contsructive.

CBP

OMG, many of you (and the article's author) do not get it.

You might never get listed. You site is not in a queue to be listed. It is not in a queue to be ignored. It is not in a queue, period. Think of it as a crowd of listings milling around, waiting to be called out. They might never be.

If people would stop thinking of sites as "waiting to be listed" and instead think of them as "hopefullly going to be found to be good enough for a listing" then the misunderstandings of what ODP is all about and how it works should end.

__________________
ODP meta-editor kctipton

Obviously you don't know me so I'll ignore the opening A/C comment.

"post"worthy?

Sure - I'll even buy entertaining for many - right up until they are the center of entertainment - and then its more about being professionally attacked and not "post"worthy anymore.

Unprofessional conduct is unprofessional conduct - and the shade of grey - isn't really white or black.

But for the record I have yet to see DMOZ add to their mainpage... WebProWorld isn't so "PRO" after all! thus would tend to lean towards DMOZ being more professional than WebProWorld.

__________________
New daily advice on Advance SEO, Copyright & DMCA @ Twitter

cbp:

Why you are frantically trying to defend DMOZ is beyond me. Even though DMOZ is not a directory geared to assist webmasters, it WOULD NOT EXIST without them; but I guess DMOZ has the right to put themselves up on a pedestal.

Why do many of the editors feel the need to impolitely respond to webmaster’s requests and react dismissively? I am sure some spammers deserve it, but the “shoot now ask questions later” mindset towards Joe webmaster is getting old here. A little etiquette wouldn’t hurt as part of the editor recruitment requirements. And enough with the "but we're free" crap. You put a "Suggest URL" link on a directory site that is the size of DMOZ - then expect people to get upset when they don't hear from the editors. You don't want to hear the complaining and "whining" then take the link off.

I think because the directory has grown so big that the editors have developed an "almightier than thou" mindset. From the posts I've seen here, editor's responses to posts at www.resource-zone.com and my own experiences with editors at DMOZ, it is clear that this directory has become nothing more than a power trip for the editors. And if it weren't for Google’s reliance on it most of us would most likely drop all attempts to please the almighty DMOZ like a bag of rotten potatoes.

So don’t get too high up on yourself there; the only direction to go when you’re that high up is down – free or not!

When enough people are saying the same thing maybe it's time to LISTEN!

Because he would defend you with the same zealous approach if you were publicly being harassed.

__________________
New daily advice on Advance SEO, Copyright & DMCA @ Twitter

I don't see you coming here correcting factual errors. Have you counted how many not true statements have been posted in this thread.

You are showing your misunderstadings. DMOZ (like any other "business") does listen to its users ("customers") ... webmasters trying to get a listing are just not the user/customer. The users of DMOZ data are the user/customer.

yeah - its just another unconstructive whinge from someone with limited understanding of DMOZ that does not help anyone.

CBP

As for all these accusations of abuse or, appallingly, confessions of abuse, please forward information to http://report-abuse.dmoz.org with enough specifics to allow the problem(s) to be found and remedied.

__________________
ODP meta-editor kctipton

Instead of saying "Rubbish" why not ask me to prove my point because I for one would be VERY INTERESTED to know who COULD deal with it!

Why does the DMOZ editor I am on about have numerous sites listed in EACH CATEGORY of a broad subject on DMOZ and yet competitors like me and probably quite a few others get completely ignored?

Furthermore, I have been on a DMOZ forum in the past and this issue was brought up then and even named the person (editor).

This might be my first post on here but I am a well respected member on others AND as a matter of fact it was an email I received touching on this subject that made me join in the first place.

My first post is based on proof and if there is someone I can report it to then I will do so immediately!

(ADDED) Thanks kctipton. I'll be contacting them and I will let you all know the outcome!

Okay.
Prove your point.

As kctipton said:
As an editor I get sick of seeing all these alegations about abuse and no proof, so sorry if you did not like the "rubbsh" - but the place to post this has bee posted nuerous time all over the internet, is linked from resource zone etc

I have nothing to do with abuse reporting at DMOZ (I am a relatively 'junior' editor) - so do not know how many are valid. Its just you see people making all these widesprad claims in a whole range of forums .... to me its a credibility issue that they bash DMOZ with it first in public and not go through the right channels to see if it is actually true.

CBP

See the previous post and send facts.

Your "guess" is as good as my "guess"... unfortunately the only answer to your questions lay at bringing these matters to the attention of DMOZ in detail, and through official channels.

Posting them in public "here" will never get any resolve, and actually makes your claims less credible as your own motive becomes suspect.

__________________
New daily advice on Advance SEO, Copyright & DMCA @ Twitter

First timer...I actually usually do not post, but when I received the Webpronews email, I couldn't help it.

We all know the score. DMOZ is absolutely 100% subjective. There is no true standard and every editor has their own. There is also an incredible arrogance. I read the DMOZ forums and I can't believe the responses that come from moderators and editors. Like nothing is wrong.

Well, it is a free directory and under their structure they do have the right to run it as they see fit. However, with the imprtance and size of the directory today, I think they need a complete overhaul. There is one thing that everyone forgets. It isn't owned by a non-profit. It is owned by AOL. I think if we webmasters want to really change it and make it fair, the only real way to do it is to go to the head. AOL. Yes, I am advocating that complaints start to go to Netscape and AOL so that they know how unhappy hundreds if not thousands of webmasters are with the way the directory is run.

I think it would be great if DMOZ was turned into a for profit directory with a "review fee". It would be fair, it would keep everything on a level playing field and it would get rid of the arogance of the editors because they would all be fired! I read a quote from one of the DMOZ moderators that it wouldn't be a good idea. Of course it wouldn't only for the DMOZ editors.

I am sure you are a nice guy/gal but you seem to have as much hostility towards WPW as the some others here have towards DMOZ. Neither is perfect.

That said I would agree that on the surface DMOZ is a whole lot more professional than WPW. I think this site is great, but it built it's popularity on stories just like this and spamming us 24/7.

For the record I think we need a directory like ODP. I would just like to see the sites with value get added. The "I wanna sell my viagra" sites can rot in hell. The spamming issue is most likely why the rest of us are suffering long waits.

Thanks,
Jim

__________________
Jim Starkweather
Webmaster - Armorama.com

Thats what Yahoo and other directories do - if you want to pay for a listing, go to them. DMOZ has a different "business model" - whats the point of having all the directories following the same "business" model? This"buisness model" has built it into the biggest and fastest growing directory - why change it?

The DMOZ social contract means there will never be paid listings.

CBP

I for one would pay a fee just to be told a straight "YES" or "NO" in a timely fashion.

So would the spammers ....

Submit and forget.

CBP

That's a pretty hypocritical answer isn't it?
If we never posted in public we would never get answers would we?

As for the last bit about "motives" you've got me stumped on that one!

By the way, well said markval

It would probably deter a lot of spammers from submitting to DMOZ in the first place if there was a fee involved. The fees would cover the cost of having to review worthless sites and weed them out -- then the true content guys would have a fair shot at getting in. A year or two to get into the directory just does not seem realistic.

I understand DMOZ's concept of looking out for the best interests of the surfer instead of the webmaster; but what I don't understand is why the guy who works so hard to provide great content to the surfer gets pushed aside. Again, DMOZ would not be where they are if it wasn't for the webmasters. Dime a dozen or not, a lot of us work very hard at what we do and there should be an avenue or channel for us that does not take a year or two.

Now I think we're getting somewhere.
Maybe having editors who weren't allowed to place their own sites would be a good idea but then again how would they know.