|
Charging for inclusion would defeat the point, as charging for review (as Yahoo) would. However neither are likely to happen simply because DMOZ exists purely for itself not as a listing service for webmasters. This is why submissions are ignored, and as 99.9% of the submissions are simply garbage which would be rejected by any sane person why should they be be bothered.
Google has never valued the DMOZ data highly, it was picked up for the RDF dump as a quick means to seed their database, and the fact that it already had the crap weeded out was an extra benefit. The myth of Google placing huge value on a DMOZ listing is another misguided error over cause and effect. DMOZ has around 4000 other "directories" pulling the RDF, this is what created the impression of high value at Google back when links were just about everything needed to rank highly.
Recently the vast majority of these clones have been ignored for any linkpop/PR value so the perceived (or real) value of DMOZ is diminishing.
The odd thing is no-one ever mentions DMOZ and Yahoo, and Yahoo is far more sensitive to links in volume than Google (Google is the anchor text not just the quantity of links) ever was or is.
__________________
Chris. ->> Links are advertising NOT optimising!! <<-
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
Thought for today:- I SEO the only industry where all the cowboys are Indians?
|