DMOZ Delisted?
Monday, September 24th, 2007;
-- Jordan McCollum |
Last week, Rand Fishkin gave a good round up and reasoning behind what appears to be a recent Google penalty for sub-par directories. It looks like he might be able to add one more devalued directory to his list: DMOZ.
Search Engine Land reports that DMOZ is no longer showing up in search results for keywords [dmoz], [www.dmoz.org], [open directory] or [open directory project]. Pages from subdirectories and several folders deep (and the ‘unavailable’ page) still show up in search results, however, the root page does not:
This is just the latest in a string of negative publicity for DMOZ. As we’ve mentioned before, last month, Shoemoney said that his site was removed from the directory after he refused to pay an extorting DMOZ editor. Then Joost de Valk, a DMOZ editor, tried to look into the allegations—and had his editorial account deleted.
Oh, DMOZ. We thought things might be looking up for you when you started accepting sites for review again, but alas. Even Google doesn’t respect you now. How long before the all search engines have followed suit?
Similar posts you may like...
Save & Share: 
Category: Google, SEM Industry
Forward: Email This Post
September 24th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
This is great news. I used to be an editor but was disabled for inactivity. I was always amazed at how much time the editors worked in there. I remember how two meta editors actually fell in love and got married to edit together happily ever after.
I never saw anything crooked, but now maybe it is becoming clear why certain “volunteers” worked so hard.
September 24th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Jordan - the bizarre redirections (301s and 302s) might also be to blame. Google’s been listing pages that technically re-point to other places on the domain, and while the directories that were penalized generally can’t rank for anything, DMOZ still appears to be ranking for plenty of non-branded searches.
September 24th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
I am very happy to hear this! DMOZ is just a sh*t!
They no longer review any site even those strictly meeting their guidelines. I will be more happier when DMOZ is banned from Google and all other search engines.
September 24th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
[...] : The Open Directory’s Home Page Goes Missing In Google (via Marketing Pilgim) Post Author : Kevin Authors Website : Blogging Tips Post Tags : [...]
September 24th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
[...] websites and blogs are discussing the current state and future possibilities of Dmoz, but the biggest question is how many people [...]
September 24th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
[...] This fact was also covered by David Naylor and Marketing Pilgrim. [...]
September 25th, 2007 at 2:58 am
[...] parezca raro, me entero por Jordan McCollum de que el directorio de directorios, dmoz.org , desaparece de [...]
September 25th, 2007 at 7:33 am
[...] (Source) Oh, DMOZ. We thought things might be looking up for you when you started accepting sites for review again, but alas. Even Google doesn’t respect you now. How long before the all search engines have followed suit? [...]
September 25th, 2007 at 7:44 am
This going to be a deep impact on some SEO guys who used this site.
September 25th, 2007 at 11:50 am
thats what was normal to expect, every other day trusted sources of the internet get spammed, and search engines have no other choise than taking an action.
another example, few month ago wikipedia made all external links nofollow.
September 25th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Honestly, DMOZ is so outdated that it has become irrelevant. In many cases I believe they are worse that some of the paid directories out there. I can’t blame Google for de-listing them.
September 25th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
[...] barra verde. El directorio de Google se actualizó hace un mes después de más de un año. Además Dmoz parece que ha desaparecido de los resultados de Google, no se sabe si por un error o por que ha sido penalizado por alguna [...]
September 25th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Dmoz is corrupt, so this is a good thing. I just feel bad for all of the well promoted directories that were penalized as well.
September 26th, 2007 at 3:01 am
As per usual, the facts get in the way of a good story.
Shoemoney lied to get some links and traffic to his site. Look at all the fools who fell for it!
DMOZ being delisted is simply the result of the 301’s that DMOZ set up as the DMOZ directory was at the www and non-www versions of .com and .org
Every site that puts up a 301 goes through a short period of relisting via Google. Look at tall the fools who had read all sorts of comspiracies into this simple fact.
September 26th, 2007 at 6:22 am
Craig,
I dont think that anyone who knows who Shoemoney is would agree with you, Jeremy (aka shoemoney) does not make money from shoemoney.com (yes there are som ads but c’mon), he has other arbitrage and other projects where he makes money and he would not lie and damage his reputation for few more thousands visitors which would add few hundred bucks.
you can go and compare the pages from archive.org
it has nothing to do 301 or others, just dont try to use tech terms for others not to understand what its all about and believe u.
September 26th, 2007 at 6:58 am
Sounds like it may be temporary - but really - DMOZ is crap - lucky if sites were listed years ago but what’s the point of a dominant directory if ya can’t get into it by love, money or having a superb site? Realistically - if Goog were just to signifianctly demote it’s importance it would be fine.
September 26th, 2007 at 7:08 am
DMOZ is completely useless, and has been for a couple of years now. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves.
September 26th, 2007 at 9:31 am
This is the best news I have heard all morning. The absolute worst directory online. Cheers!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:06 am
I simply do not understand the problem, DMOZ is fine by me. Sure, they take a long time to approve a site; but at least the site, when it is eventually approved, is knwon to have been genuinly validated. I know there are a few more around, but please let’s have a few more directories like DMOZ that only acept decent sites with genuine origional content. I believe that the influence of directory links generally in on the down, good directories like DMOZ are a bid plus and should be appreciated by search engines.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:41 am
Quested says: DMOZ is fine by me..
Answer: Then you clearly don’t know what’s going on Terry - this might help: http://www.turnerdow.co.uk/seo-Trouble-at-DMOZ.htm
September 26th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
The shoemoney extortion was link bait.
It has been thoroughly debunked at many other sites. The evidence is still there.
There was no listed site to remove from the ODP, and therefore no threat of extortion.
http://blogoscoped.com/forum/106601.html
His sites were banned in 2005 for trying to bribe editors.
September 26th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
DMOZ is SH*T, but unfortunately it’s still showing up in my search results.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Has been explained on the new Official DMOZ Blog. See http://blog.dmoz.org/2007/09/26/the-search-for-dmoz/ for the details.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:29 am
[...] DMOZ好像真的被Google惩罚了，搜索DMOZ，甚至www.dmoz.org open directory，open directory projects都找不到它的首页。有一些二级页面还有排名 不知是否跟这事有关，或者赶上了Google清理目录网站 的大潮？详细报道，请看这里或这里。DMOZ官方也开博 了，不知是否与这相关。针对最近大批目录网站被降 ，有人还想浑水摸鱼，：） [...]
September 27th, 2007 at 7:48 am
lets pretend we have newbie readers and actually explian why it benefit or hurt the webmasters if DMOZ is removed from Google. I personally never liked the DMOZ system and yes I submitted some sites [ years ago] i never stop to think if they ever were approved or not…
September 27th, 2007 at 8:45 am
No its now listed again see once again.http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=active&rls=EGLC% 2CEGLC%3A2006-12%2CEGLC%3Aen&q=www.dmoz.org
September 27th, 2007 at 9:18 am
So it got its rankings back, but I really wonder why did this happen? If there were only the funny redirects then we should buzz a bit about the issue and warn other webmasters…
September 27th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Wow, it figures. Just when you thought DMOZ’s kharma was given a swift kick in the back end by the net universe.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
What’s worse with dmoz is, if you are accepted at some point, that they gave you a decent title/description, ’cause good luck getting it changed if it’s not. I’ve found it to be as bad as getting a title of your liking on linkpartners.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pm
When is the last time anyone gained anything from DMOZ? That’s ok I’ll wait.
September 28th, 2007 at 12:24 am
t is again visible in topbox results and it still has value.
September 28th, 2007 at 4:24 am
Great to hear!
Time for a better change.
September 29th, 2007 at 6:53 am
DMOZ is completely useless,and I think is not monitored by any editors too.
September 29th, 2007 at 6:54 am
I tried to get listed many years back but still didn’t got success.
September 29th, 2007 at 6:57 am
Its not issue that if you are not success then its useless. do some more efforts.
September 29th, 2007 at 8:07 am
I have a website that I submitted a domain that was a musical genre of the .com of the same name and was STILL not listed. DMOZ is garbage.
September 30th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Now that’s put a smile on my face. DMOZ have for way too long been seen as an “authority” in the directory world - now they’re getting their just rewards for a pretty poor service over the last few years.
October 3rd, 2007 at 5:53 am
[...] calculado cuando el pagerank era otra cosa. Un ejemplo reciente de estos errores o podemos ver en la caída de DMOZ, aunque lo mejor de todo fue ver como se excusaron de mala manera, para que no se descubriese el [...]
October 20th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
I have only managed to get listed once out of perhaps 10 site submissions (not all owned by me) so I don’t bother. Rather than sling mud at the ODP, let’s wait for Google to unveil its own directory - its hiring in the Local and Classifieds arena suggests that something is brewing there.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
This is the first I have heard of Google’s “own” directory, I look forward to seeing how this will pan out.
June 4th, 2008 at 5:46 am
I don’t like DMOZ. It eat itself grateful bureaucratic including methods. No one of my sites was reviewed started from 2005…