DMOZ – A Gambling Resource?

DMOZ

This is the third article I have now written about DMOZ or the Open Directory Project, during my time as a volunteer editor with the directory which started back in October 2009, when my application to edit in the Games/Gambling/Guides/Reviews category was accepted.

My editing experience with the Open Directory was for a total of four years, from 2009 – 2013. Whilst the importance of the directory in terms of ‘search’ has diminished, it is in my view still a good resource.

The purpose of this article, is to put to bed some myths about the directory, particularly some assertions made from a very vocal minority of gambling webmasters, concerning some of the categories I myself as an editor have permissions to edit in.

The aims of the directory are clear, and that is to be a worthwhile resource to the visitors of the directory and not to act as a link resource for webmasters.

Misconceptions put to Bed

It is certainly true that not many editors like editing in the Gambling branch. In part very much down to the attitude  shown by those few individuals who view any work on the directory in that area with a high degree of suspicion.

  1. Furthermore I have read many misguided comments on forums and ridiculous blogs which I plan to tackle in this article.A Website Domain can only have one listing. – INCORRECT – If the website has good quality content covering many areas, the site in question can have multiple listings across multiple categories in the directory.
  2. An editor is not allowed to list their own site – INCORRECT – If the website offers unique content which is valued as a good resource for a visitor, then an editor can list his own site. However the editor has to apply the same listing guidelines to his/her own site as he does any other site he/she reviews.
  3. A site cannot be listed if it is new – INCORRECT – There is nothing in the editorial guidelines that disallows a site from being listed based on the age of the site. The purpose of DMOZ is to be a useful resource to it’s visitors. If a site was launched this morning and contains valuable content it can be listed, if an editor with the appropriate permissions comes across said site and reviews it.
  4. Editors have to review sites in the date order they were suggested – INCORRECT – Sites suggested by the members of the public are only one resource used by editors when finding suitable sites to list. Indeed many editors do not even bother looking at the suggestion pool. Furthermore, editors can choose which sites to review from the pool in whatever order they wish. It is true some editors review the pool in suggested date order. However many editors review sites from the pool if an accurate and unspammy title and description has been used by the person suggesting the site.
  5. A site has to have hundreds if not thousands of pages of content to be listed – INCORRECT – As long as the site being reviewed is not a ‘Business Card Site’ ( ie a site with one page ) and does contain useful and  unique information which will improve the category as a resource, then it can be listed. Whether it has 5 pages, 10 pages or 10,000 pages.
  6. An editor has to ensure the category or categories he has permission to edit in, is continually updated –INCORRECT – Being an editor is a volunteer task and is viewed as a hobby. The only thing which is asked of you as an editor is to make at least one edit in any four month period. Failing to do so will mean you editor account will close automatically.
  7. Beauty is not skin deep. When reviewing a site an editor does not just take into account the make up of the home page. If a site has a lot of affiliate links on the home page this does not preclude it’s listing. Certainly not, if the actual content of the pages within far outweighs the outward affiliate links.
  8. Once a site is listed, it stays listed. – INCORRECT – No one site is guaranteed a listing for life. There are a number of reasons why, such as no updates to the site for an age, site becomes hijacked or in the case of a forum, the activity drops off a cliff and just becomes a banner and affiliate link farm. These are just a few of many many reasons.
  9. A directory listing is the HOLY GRAIL of SEO. – INCORRECT – This may well have been the case back in 2001, but alas a link within the directory is just that, a link. It will not effect your positions and serps in the search engines or give you some seo turbo boost to your site and quite frankly nor should it. I am sure this will be disappointing to some, but if you don’t believe me, have a search on Matt Cutt’s blog, as he blogged about DMOZ a few months back.

In Summary

If you are a webmaster that has come across this page, submit your site and then forget about DMOZ. Whether your site is listed or not will not have a single influence on how your site ranks in the various search engines.

Use it how we do, as a resource for all things gambling related. As in our view it is still a worthy resource.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on Casinos-Online.uk are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close