Google and DMOZ (The Open Directory Project) – The Odd Couple of Internet Directory
Google and DMOZ – Organizational Dichotomies in Partnership
In one nook you’ve Google – analytic, computerized, person interactive, pushed by way of rules-based mathematical algorithms, virtual potency – depended on and revered.
In the opposite nook you’ve The Open Directory Project (DMOZ) – totally people-driven, uncommunicative, no guidelines, no comments, inefficient, analog – no longer depended on.
It is like having Herman Hollerith’s punch card device feed information into lately’s grid and tremendous computing setting. It simply DOES NOT COMPUTE! Stone Age meets the Digital Age.
So what’s the courting between this two not going companions?
Google instructions the Worldwide Directory of Website Registration. But you can’t simply upload your Website to the Google Directory. Some time in the past, any individual at Google made up our minds that in case your web page was once indexed in DMOZ (The Open Directory Project) then it was once worthy of conceivable inclusion within the Google Directory. BTW Alexa additionally opts for this ‘good-enough-for DMOZ then-good-enough for-us’ way.
The Open Directory Project has lengthy been chastised for its troll-like gatekeeper presence when is involves granting DMOZ listing standing that feeds key international Internet Directories, like Google and Alexa. A fully volunteer group, The Open Directory Project has won accusations of corruption, manipulation and incompetence relating to figuring out what domain names get indexed within the DMOZ listing. Some web sites had been indexed on DMOZ someday after which days later got rid of – with no longer even a easy rationalization to why or why no longer. This is simply mainly WRONG!
The article, Ineffective DMOZ by way of Baron Turner (circa 2005), successfully articulates the wrongs of this volunteer group.
Why has Google by no means intervened by way of advancing DMOZ from this extremely suspect setting of an “all volunteer” editorial group to a pro, responsible, semi-automated and communicative editorial group? One of the ones internet mysteries.
Example: Our group has eight business web sites. In the remaining 12 months simplest two of the 8 web sites have had the glory of having indexed on DMOZ. Why those two were given accredited and the opposite six had been rejected is the “sixty-four thousand greenback query”. Or had been they rejected? No manner of figuring out. DMOZ has no comments mechanism! There is not any manner of figuring out if:
1. a submission request was once if truth be told won by way of one the DMOZ volunteer editors
2. whether it is within the DMOZ queue for evaluate or
3. if it was once rejected by way of a DMOZ editor and WHY it was once rejected!
The absence of ANY form of comments mechanism as a part of the DMOZ procedure is solely a damaged visitor control device. Each and each Webmaster that submits to the Open Directory Project is a DMOZ CUSTOMER! DMOZ offends its shoppers by way of appearing disrespect to those webmaster and search engine optimization execs.
Google represents capitalism, competitiveness and dynamic exchange. DMOZ is just too on the subject of a a 3rd global Dictatorship. The subject of this not going partnership may well be subject matter for a brand new Reality TV collection. Wait! Maybe the Google-DMOZ Irony is subject matter higher suited to The Daily Show with Jon Stewart or The Colbert Report with Stephen Colbert.
In the 30 plus years within the High Tech Business, I’ve come to look at that the longer you’ve the similar crew of unaccountable humans curious about a procedure, a procedure this is unchecked or no longer audited, then you’re going to get laxness, vanity and alternative for corruption.
Maybe it’s time for a Google REALITY CHECK on The Open Directory Project. Google has a duty to carry the now arcane processes of the DMOZ group into the customer-centric age of Trust and Accountability.
Until then best possible of good fortune in getting indexed within the The Open Directory Project.