It's 2012 --- is DMOZ still relevant at all?

It's 2012 --- is DMOZ still relevant at all?


We have a few pet sites and college related sites.

Do you guys/gals think its still relevant to even bother with DMOZ?

Thanks.

 

I don't see any problem with dmoz...

 

Dmoz was relevant when Google was not in the scene.. facebook was not on the pecture.

And it will be same in 2012 also.

 

It is as relevant as any other free directory... for every perk it has, there is a matching flaw.

If you are submitting to directories, be sure to submit to the ODP. Whether or not you get listed is seemingly a crapshoot based on the whim of the editing team. Some greatsites seemingly wait years and still are not listed, some craptastic sites have been listed within a few days and have been there for years.

But again, if you ARE submitting to directories, submit to this one.

 

Yes and no... It's still relevant (barely). It just doesn't play as big of a role as it once did.

 

Definitely. It still effects your page authority and pagerank.

 

I'd ask you to prove that with any data you may have.


A rather long while back, google used to actually suggest to webmasters that they submit to the ODP and that it would help. They have removed that from their documentation. This does indicate that they no longer hold DMOZ as high as used to.

And more recently they have even dumped their clone of the ODP, which further suggests the lowering of the importance of the directory.

At one point it was also considered that that directory submissions would help a site, this has been shown to no longer be the case, just look at the lowered importance of directories in general.

Check out this video from Matt Cutts:http://www.webpronews.com/google-gives-an-update-on-how-it-thinks-about-dmoz-2011-08

 

Sure, especially with the Penguin update, directories are pretty much disregarded, but DMOZ is still a high value website with high page / domain authority.

I've seen the video, he specifically says that they haven't fully taken it out.

 

Matt says...

so yeah, they have not taken it all the way out, but they have certainly brushed it under the rug so to speak.

The ODP clones are certainly not helping... even if they all have decent PR, or ANY PR for that matter, most of it is lost due to duplicate content, and it being a link farm full of dead links, and sites with duplicate content themselves.

the old addage still applies though.... a link is a link is a link is a link.

 

It suggests nothing of the sort. It was done because the Google Directory would have been a clone, a duplicate of DMOZ and would therefore be duplicate content.......it had nothing to do with their opinion of DMOZ. Google couldnt go around penalising everyone for duplicate content, yet have a duplicate content database.

 

i think it still play an important role in 2012

 

Why not? The ODP has no issues with breaking their own rules, in fact, most of the editors support such shenanigans.


Though something Google has done to show that the ODP has less clout then it once did was to remove it's suggestion that people submit to it, as well as how they have penalized directories in general.

 

My opinion is that not as valuable as before!however it's worth to submit !

 

I think they did it because of webmasters preying on it so heavily.

 

I forgot this directory for almost 10 years, LOL, used to submit on it diligently.

 

The reason that they don't rely on it anymore is because the train went off the tracks.
Time was when a good quality site ha d a chance to get listed based on quality.


When you have 40 gazillion submissions and 12 editors to go through them (or ignore them, most recently) then its a model that is wholly ineffective and broken.

 

Although DMOZ in its self, lets face it a poor site - google still sees the directory as authority. So for serps and ranking its probably a gogd idea to get your site included into the directory

 

that is really not the case anymore.

Google removed their clone.
Google stopped suggesting we submit to the ODP (and yes, they used to)
Google said it holds no more sway then any other site.

A link is a link is a link, and that is all the ODP is anymore, just a link.

Though it's a link in a directory, and Google does not really care for those all that much...

There is also little evidence that a link in DMOZ does any good at all anymore.

 

DMoz is still relevant as a directory, however it is hopelessly outdated. In my opinion you are better off paying a small amount and getting a listing in Yahoo or similar high value directory. Then focus the rest of your energy on quality content, social media.

 

If we are talking from the SEO/Webmaster/I-want-a-link-badly-fraternity then it should be any other PR7 free directory, of which I'm aware of a small handful.

Whilst I wouldn't agree with the way you say it, the end result is the same. It can be difficult to gain a listing, and this is explained quite well in a thread by RobJones where he mentions that mathematically speaking, based on the number of submissions versus the number of editors, it's always going to be difficult to find the nuggets of gold...

Indeed.

It no longer has the aura. I'm someone with a long term investment in the directory industry. I might even have what you call a bias. But I'll concede DMOZ no longer has the aura that it once did.

It's still a relevant resource. One might add that in certain niches it is highly relevant.

Is it showing its age? Absolutely. But so are many sites that were once thought of in a strong way.

If it's related and carries the juice, the same as any on-topic link would.

It does indicate that, well it would if they (MC) didn't come out and said removing it really had nothing to do with them no longer holding Yahoo! Dir or DMOZ directory in esteem. They removed the suggestion because it wasn't a "must do". The overwhelming number of threads on this forum would show that people thought (and some still think) they need to be listed in DMOZ. They don't.

Again it would if that's the reason they did it. MC explains the reason they dumped their version of the ODP is that it got very few visits. It wasn't useful for them to "add value" as he suggests by filtering ODP data via pagerank.

He also says that it hasn't been dumped everywhere, he gives an example (all of this stuff is from the 2011 video you linked to by the way) of it still being active in some asian countries because it's quicker to use it.

Again. This is a bad way of looking at the situation. If Google says "directory submissions can help a site", people go out and submit to 10k of the things regardless of quality. Directory submissions can help a site, the same as any link/listing/post can. They just don't have some mystical super power. They are for all intents and purposes, the same as anything else, and they are ranked/regarded via the same criteria.

They never "relied" on it. That's a myth right there. They may have used it, in the very early days as a seed, but the entire point of Google wasn't to ever rely on anyone else, it was to forge their own way of being...

Google does use the ODP for snippets still, but they do this in cases when they are unable to get the content of the page themselves.

Hard to argue with...

Well let's be clear it's a PR7 (and down) link depending on where you get it from.

It doesn't? evidence?

Google doesn't care for links in junk directories. But then, it never did. the same as it doesnt care for repeated sig links in forums (penguin matched text anchor) or countless blog comments in do-follow blogs. In reality, GOogle doesn't care for bad links.

A directory link, a real directory link, is based upon a recommendation and/or a vetting procedure. Very few links can claim that, and as such a directory link in many ways is a much better link than the one you bought.

Think about it. WHy is a signature link good in a forum? You place it yourself. You get given that link whether you make a good post or not.

DMOZ (and many other directories) have listings/links that are difficult to obtain. I'd suggest that makes them a better link.

That's just a complete myth right there. It's also a contradiction of everything you've said.

If it's just a link as per Google's comments, then it has the same worth (link-wise) as any other site with the same calibre. (pagerank/traffic/authority/etc). So let's not start this "it doesn't do anything". It is still a good link, it just doesn't have the massive aura it used to. An aura which was misplaced from the outset, because webmasters/SEOs put the directory on a pedestal!