Hey everyone!

Back in January, we kicked off the new year by introducing everyone to our team. Today, we're excited to introduce our newest team member, Andy. Please join us in welcoming him to the community!

Emily

Andy McMahon, Product Manager (dciandy)
"I first went online in 1989 with a Commodore 64 and a 300 baud modem. I remember when IM's were called OLM's (online messages) and when you had to pay $40 to get the Netscape browser. Yes, I guess I'm the equivalent of an online old timer! It's been 10 years since I came to AOL, where I've worked as a product manager in the Local space. I'm excited to be part of the DMOZ team because I've always considered the ODP to be the best of the web – I come here because I trust the sites I'll see are high quality in one form or another. I look forward to being a part of this project and working with this great community."

For our latest post, editor glippitt has provided an excellent example of a place where DMOZ's resources shine. Enjoy!

Emily

- - - - - - - - - -

Everybody loves Google, everybody loves Wikipedia - so why doesn't everybody love DMOZ? Ask people how they search the web, and most will tell you what Google does well, what Wikipedia does well - and what DMOZ doesn't do well. When you think about it, that's quite an odd way to look at search vehicles, isn't it? My car doesn't do backflips, but that doesn't mean I stop driving. I also can't take a plane to my local shopping area, ride a bicycle across the ocean, or take a train where there aren't train tracks.

Let's look at what DMOZ does do well, and the when and how of using various search vehicles to help users find what they're looking for.

Perhaps you heard something on the news about the Somali pirates and want to learn more. You'd likely search Google News for the most recent coverage, perhaps sorting by date. Background information? You might read Piracy in Somalia in Wikipedia and search for Somali pirates with Google web search. Now what about Somalia in general? How did it get to this point? What's the history of the country, and what's going on with their government? How do you find answers to these questions without wasting a lot of time? This is where DMOZ shines.

Google for Somalia or history of Somalia or government of Somalia and you'll get a mixed bag. Google combines relevance with popularity, which means the more specific your query, the better the results. For broader sorts of queries, some excellent sources may be ranked low and you may miss them. Some links from special interest groups may be popular enough to be ranked high, but that doesn't mean they're providing a balanced view. Some less-than-current sources may be ranked high simply because they've been around a long time and lots of other sites have linked to them in the past. Sometimes they use 'relevant' keywords and page titles to game the system and achieve a higher ranking than they really deserve. Look at this result from that last Google search:

Quote:

"somalia: the official news from the government of somalia - 9:11am Somalia: Somali Pirates holding over 200 hostages. www.somaligovernment.org/ - 29k"

Looks current, right? Wrong. Click on it and you may realize it's the site of warlord Abdinur Darman who declared himself President in 2007 - but Google's automated process has no way of knowing that, and if you don't look closely you may be misled into thinking it's from the current government. (The true official site was unavailable for much of April because it had run out of bandwidth.) To avoid confusion, DMOZ has now listed the link with this description: Site of presidential claimant Abdinur Ahmed Darman, the leader of Somalia's Hawiya clan who declared himself head of state in July 2003. Google (and others) may later pick up that description and use it in their search results instead of the current snippet. We all want users to have the correct information.

Other Google options? You can find authoritative sources by searching Google Scholar for Somalia, but that isn't necessarily the level of information you want.

What about Somalia (and its sub-articles) in Wikipedia? Articles 'in the news' often draw 'strong-minded partisans' as editors, so while the information may be interesting one would want to chase down all the footnotes to determine if they reference reliable sources accurately summarized - and if the reliable sources are truly representative, or if they were 'cherry-picked' to shade the view - which means you're back to Google to find what might be missing. All this for just the most current version on Wikipedia. Click on the history and discussion tabs and see how often the article has been changed and if there are 'edit wars' going on. Wikipedia is useful, but it doesn't fill every need and it certainly isn't the only source one should rely on, particularly on controversial topics.

Or, you can go to DMOZ's Somalia category. Start with Guides and Directories to find background information. Perhaps you're interested in Government sites. If you're curious about local and foreign efforts to help the country, you can view Aid and Development and Economic Development. Perhaps you want to check out the local News or look at some Maps and Views. Some Travel Guides have useful information about a country. You can also move your search up to West Africa and Africa, or down to the regions within Somalia such as Somaliland.

You'll notice some Somalia categories from the DMOZ Topical directory, such as Colleges and Universities and Soccer, are 'linked in' to Regional. 'Sharing' these categories helps people searching for the same information, but starting from a different point or point of view. There are also links to the associated categories in the World directories (such as French) and the Kids and Teens directory.

There's all sorts of relevant information to be found on the web, and the broader the topic the more useful DMOZ is. Use it as one of your search vehicles and you may be surprised how much more efficient and productive your searches become. Just don't expect it to be the perfect combination Mars rover-car-plane-scooter-train-bicycle. There's no such thing as a silver bullet in search - not even Google.

Several weeks ago, we asked webmasters and general users to submit their questions about DMOZ. While we aren't able to answer every question, we've chosen a representative sample to address here on the blog.

Thank you to everyone who participated! We appreciate your thoughts and insights, and your dedication to the ODP community.

Emily

- - - - - - - - - - -

"I just started my first website and someone told me about DMOZ. What is it, and how does a site like mine benefit if it's included in the directory?"
Welcome! We're glad you asked.

First, we'll tell you what it is: DMOZ (or the Open Directory Project) is the world's largest and most comprehensive human-edited directory of the Web. It is constructed and maintained by a vast, global community of volunteer editors.

Each editor helps maintain a category (or, in the case of some more experienced editors, several categories) of interest to them by performing tasks such as adding new sites, removing broken links, and re-categorizing sites whose purposes have changed since they were originally added. Some editors also perform tasks that enhance the directory and the ODP community. Examples of side projects editors undertake include building tools to help make the editing process more efficient, mentoring new editors and contributing to newsletters and blogs. You can read more about one editor's typical day here.

Now, what DMOZ is not: First and foremost, it is not a paid listing service. It is a violation of our social contract and terms of use to either offer money to have a link included in the directory or for an editor to accept money to add a link to the directory. The real value of the directory is in its editorial neutrality, and these practices harm the integrity of the contents and cast shadows over the overwhelming number of site owners and editors who follow the rules. If you suspect abuse, you can report it using our abuse reporting tool.

DMOZ is also not a search engine, in and of itself; however, it is one of a number of tools used by some algorithmic search engines to classify or rank sites.

There are several benefits to sites that are included in the directory. Because some search engines do use it as part of their ranking system, a listing in DMOZ can sometimes help grow traffic to a site. Another benefit is that many organizations take advantage of free access to the directory's content to help populate their own sites, so your site can get additional exposure in communities that share interests and values with your site.

"I feel like DMOZ's site selection process isn't transparent enough. Can we get additional details on how sites are selected for inclusion in the directory?"
This is a comment we hear time and time again, and most of the time, this is in relation to the site suggestion process. We recognize that our imperfect site suggestion system has a lot to do with that. When you suggest URLs, please keep a couple of things in mind about how the process works:

• Our suggestion system unfortunately doesn't have built-in email functionality to notify users that their suggestion has been received or reviewed. While we know that this can be frustrating, once you've entered the CAPTCHA text in the box and received the confirmation page, your suggestion has gone through.

• Many people think that there is a queue of suggested sites, but this metaphor is inaccurate. There are a number of reasons why sites are not always reviewed in the order they are received; for example, a site may have been suggested to the wrong category, it may have an unclear title or description, or the suggested site may be undergoing maintenance at the time an editor attempts to review it. Instead, a better metaphor is that suggestions made to each category go into a pool from which editors may select sites to review. A comprehensive overview of what happens to suggested sites is available here.

• Editors have many sources from which to select sites. For some categories, there may be an overwhelming number of spam suggestions that make it impractical to use the suggestion pool as a primary selection tool. This doesn't mean that our editors won't ever review the sites in the suggestion pool, or even that they won't find your site by other means. It just means that there isn't a set timeframe for review, and that times may vary based on the size, type and editor techniques of a given category.

The best thing that users can do to help the editors review suggested sites efficiently is to prepare their suggestions as well as they possibly can before submitting them. We've posted some tips on how to do that here and here, and provided information about a number of helpful resources here.


"My company makes several different products. Can I suggest my site in multiple sub-categories? Would I be better off suggesting it to a higher-level category?"
In general, sites will fit in one category, and it's best to find one appropriate category to which you will make your site suggestion. In some cases, when sites offer content in diverse product or subject areas, it may be appropriate for editors to list sub-categories separately, but this is definitely the exception rather than the rule.

Remember that the goal of a directory is a little different than the goal of a search engine. The directory provides a structure into which sites are categorized based on their similarity to each other rather than an index of all content related to a particular query term. It is more advantageous to users to have a site listed in the best category than in many somewhat related categories.


"My site is already listed, but it needs to be updated. Is there a way to tell the category editor?"
Yes! This is similar to the site suggestion process, and has been covered here in the past. Use the "Update listing" link at the top of the category your site is in.

Editors often receive a high volume of site suggestions for their categories, so ensuring that suggested sites have clear, concise titles and descriptions can aid greatly in the review process. Editor lisagirl has provided an excellent tutorial in how to make titles and descriptions that stand out in the crowd.

Emily
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

What makes a good title and description? If you ask me personally, all good things involve chocolate. I guess we're talking about other things here, but forgive me if you have uncontrollable chocolate cravings after reading this.

Here's some general help on writing good titles and descriptions. Also, before you suggest a site, look for the description link in that category. The descriptions often have additional information specific to that category. For more help, visit
http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Searching/Directories/Open_Directory_Project/Policies_and_Procedures/

TITLES:

If the site is about a business, it's simple! Titles are the business name, and nothing more.
If the site is topical in nature, the title should be the site's official name.
Titles shouldn't be a string of keywords, should be properly capitalized, and shouldn't have unnecessary punctuation marks or symbols.

Good (fictional) title examples:
- Lisagirl Chocoholics Bakery
- Theo Broma Transportation and Trucking
- Fudge Factor Accountants
- A Review of Chocolate Consumption in 2009
- Chocoholics Anonymous

Bad title examples:
- LISAGIRL CHOCOHOLICS BAKERY (all capital letters)
- Welcome to Theo Broma Trucking (uses phrases such as "Welcome to" or "Homepage of")
- The fudgiest numbers on the web, from Fudge Factor Accountants (uses advertising)
- ThEo bROmA TRaNsPoRtAtiOn aNd tRuCkInG (incorrect capitalization)
- Lisagirl Chocoholics Bakery, in Smallville (uses location or phone number)
- Chocolate Consumption, 2009, Why People Eat Chocolate, Review (a string of keywords)
- All About Chocoholics Anonymous (not the official site or organization name)

DESCRIPTIONS:
Describe the business or website, and describe the website's contents. Don't use hyperbole, advertising language, or a string of search engine keywords. Keep it simple!

Here, I've placed a good and bad (fictional) example together, for comparison. Each person's writing style is different, and descriptions may vary depending on the category. What you see here are only examples and are written in my style. If you really don't know what to write, look at listings in the category where you're suggesting the site for ideas.

***
Good:
Photo gallery displaying a personal collection of chocolate candy bar wrappers acquired between 1964 and 1979.

Bad:
These are my pics which are of the wrappers I got from eating choclit cand bars
***

Good:
Bakery and restaurant, both exclusively offering chocolate foods. Includes menus with photographs, and recipes of their most-ordered dishes.

Bad:
LisaGirl Chocholics is on 123 Main Street, Smallville, open 6am to 5 pm, and we only sell chocolate foods. This website has tantalizing meneues with mouth-watering photos, and recippes for the favoritest dishes.

***
Good:
Offers accounting services for small business owners and classes about creative financing. Includes profiles of the firm members, class details and schedules, and links to bail bond agents.

Bad:
The ultimate source for all accounting services. We have been in business since 2008. Free education! Learn all about Fudge Factor's people. Learn where to go when you need help.
***

Good:
Sales of Perugina Baci, a chocolate candy with hazelnuts, and shortbread cookies. Provides a map to the store and options for monthly shipment subscriptions.

Bad:
High quality merchandise, chocolate, candy, Perugina, Baci, and much more!


You may ask "Why should I bother writing good titles and descriptions anyway? Aren't the editors responsible for that? And besides, I don't even like chocolate". Ultimately, the editors must write decent titles/descriptions. However, the Open Directory Project editors are all volunteers, working on the project in their spare time. When you write a proper title/description, you allow us to work faster and more efficiently. By helping us, you're helping yourself. We look for good suggestions. In the sea of submissions, those with good titles/descriptions will stand out like a lighthouse beacon.

As for disliking chocolate, well, you look a little peaked...are you feverish? (I'm kidding of course! Some of my best friends prefer vanilla.)