From blog@... Thu Nov 29 10:51:12 2007
Return-Path: <dfpjd@...>
Received: (qmail 38574 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2007 18:51:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.67.94)
by m56.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2007 18:51:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n9a.bullet.mail.re1.yahoo.com) (69.147.103.200)
by mta15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2007 18:51:10 -0000
Received: from [68.142.237.88] by n9.bullet.mail.re1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2007 18:51:10 -0000
Received: from [66.218.69.2] by t4.bullet.re3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2007 18:51:09 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.78] by t2.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2007 18:51:09 -0000
X-Sender: dfpjd@...
X-Apparently-To: xodp@yahoogroups.com
X-Received: (qmail 77350 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2007 18:48:37 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (66.218.67.96)
by m44.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2007 18:48:37 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (HELO web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com) (209.191.106.91)
by mta17.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2007 18:48:37 -0000
X-Received: (qmail 64362 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Nov 2007 18:48:37 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: v3t42D4VM1lac5ujud7lAlrjUGcK8U9E..wI82pNRXTANgIYhwxK8gz9KvnCjBTfCHyCTUmTFWiFodnR60osjBlQVkoV1AaPqhVmhYbn53K.uWzHQHc-
X-Received: from [70.250.155.199] by web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:48:36 PST
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:48:36 -0800 (PST)
To: XODP Yahoo! eGroup <xodp@yahoogroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1509495881-1196362116=:64053"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <50591.64053.qm@...>
X-Originating-IP: 209.191.106.91
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0:0
From:Internet Esquire <blog@...>
Subject: [XODP Blog] This Just In: ODP Still Sucks
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=233549179; y=myCuFFwVC_XXJ2p57wu-q7cGOkBbIZWN4JB_qz4KnxU
X-Yahoo-Profile: dfpjd
X-eGroups-Edited-By: dfpjd <dfpjd@...>
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-system
X-eGroups-Approved-By: dfpjd <dfpjd@...> via web; 29 Nov 2007 18:51:08 -0000
--0-1509495881-1196362116=:64053
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1991020816-1196362116=:64053"
--0-1991020816-1196362116=:64053
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
--0-1991020816-1196362116=:64053
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
--0-1991020816-1196362116=:64053--
--0-1509495881-1196362116=:64053
Content-Type: message/rfc822
X-Apparently-To: dfpjd@... via 209.191.106.89; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:42:32 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [69.46.238.253]
Authentication-Results: mta247.mail.mud.yahoo.com from=gmail.com; domainkeys=neutral (no sig)
Received: from 69.46.238.253 (HELO iris3.directnic.com) (69.46.238.253)
by mta247.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:42:32 -0800
Received: by iris3.directnic.com (iris/0.185:relay); 29 Nov 2007 18:47:15 +0000
Received: by iris3.directnic.com (iris/0.185:789159); 29 Nov 2007 18:47:15 +0000
Delivered-To: blog@...
Reply-To: 3jAZPRwYJBCkSJYJXVLRFNQ.HTRGQTLcTIU.TWL@...
Precedence: bulk
X-Iris-Relay-Method: POP-before-SMTP for 870053
X-Iris-Envelope-Recipient: <blog@...>
X-Iris-Envelope-Sender: <3jAZPRwYJBCkSJYJXVLRFNQ.HTRGQTLcTIU.TWL@...>
X-Iris-Host: 1089054338/py-out-f130.google.com
Received: from py-out-f130.google.com (EHLO py-out-f130.google.com) (64.233.166.130)
by iris4.directnic.com (iris/0.185:789159) with ESMTP
for <blog@...> (rule 789159); 29 Nov 2007 18:36:47 +0000
Received: by py-out-f130.google.com with SMTP id f50so650781pyh
for <blog@...>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:42:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.35.108.12 with SMTP id k12mr4695187pym.1196361357001;
Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:35:57 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:35:56 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (py-out-f130.google.com: domain of 3jAZPRwYJBCkSJYJXVLRFNQ.HTRGQTLcTIU.TWL@... designates 64.233.166.130 as permitted sender) receiver=py-out-f130.google.com; client_ip=64.233.166.130; envelope-from=3jAZPRwYJBCkSJYJXVLRFNQ.HTRGQTLcTIU.TWL@...;
From: Internet Esquire <netesq@...>
To: blog@...
Subject: [XODP Blog] This Just In: ODP Still Sucks
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_13593_10739426.1196361356982"
X-BloggerMail: 78f65533b78c8bbeb75e622528ed3b1006c9620d
Content-Length: 4938
------=_Part_13593_10739426.1196361356982
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
While Googling my byline a month or so ago to keep current on any
recent gossip about me, I stumbled upon a thread at Digital Point
discussing the merits (or lack thereof) of the Dmoz Sucks website.
One "Rezo," who is apparently (one of?) the proprietor(s) of the
SevenSeek web directory, pointed out Dmoz (aka ODP) sucks (ambiguity
intentional) and recommended browsing the eponymous Dmoz Sucks website;
one "nebuchadrezzar" followed up with a glowing reference of both me
and XODP, closing with, "You guys should make yourselves known to
[David Prenatt], he would probably give you a few
pointers."Nebuchadrezzar also pointed out the fact that Jimbo Wales
frequented XODP back in the day and opined that XODP may have played a
role in helping Jimbo avoid many of the pitfalls of ODP in creating
Wikipedia. I'd like to think that were true, but (knowing Jimbo) I
doubt that he would acknowledge that XODP had any kind of profound
impact on him or on Wikipedia. Even so, Wikipedia is precisely the sort
of open content community that I had hoped to inspire and/or create
when I founded XODP, and while I have my reservations about Wikipedia,
they are minor ones, and I make a point of extolling the virtues of
Wikipedia from time to time on XODP and elsewhere.I first came across
Jimbo Wales during my tenure as Chief Evangelist at
the-late-and-never-that-great Wherewithal. Much to my surprise, Jimbo
had a distant history with one of Wherewithal's founders, and there was
some talk of licensing Wherewithal's ad serving technology to Jimbo's
company Bomis. At the time, my stock as an Internet celebrity was very
high because of XODP, which is how I and Wherewithal first came to
Jimbo's attention. At the time, I was also consulting with Project Napa
as their Chief Ontologist and Community Architect, and I also tried to
sell them on the idea of serving up ads a la Wherewithal as a way of
generating revenue for their open content people portal. However, both
of these promising business leads (and many others) were burned by
Wherewithal's founders who simply did not have the wherewithal (pun
intended) to put a profitable business deal together. Consequently, I
stopped bringing the leads to Wherewithal and started operating in
stealth mode, quietly playing matchmaker with my various business
contacts while Wherewithal faded into obscurity.The dot-com bubble had
already begun to burst when I signed on at Wherewithal and Project
Napa, but I felt (and still feel) that there was (and still is) quite a
bit of promise in the area of open content generation and indexing.
Even now I think that the ideas underlying Wherewithal and Project Napa
were sound, and I've long toyed with the idea of reincarnating both of
them in some form. Instead, I have focused on the needs of my paying
clients; occasionally, I have worked on various XODP Web Guides and
contributed to Wikipedia to satisfy my innate need to index online
content.In addition to satisfying my innate need to index online
content, the XODP Web Guides have allowed me to demonstrate "proof of
concept." And but for the fact that I am making a decent living as an
Internet consultant for attorneys, work that I truly enjoy, I would
embrace the opportunity to make more money by publishing XODP Web
Guides while also improving the quality of online content indexing.
Indeed, there may yet come a day when an investor throws so much money
at me that I will take the necessary time and effort to hire and train
enough staff to publish and maintain thousands (or even tens of
thousands) of XODP Web Guides instead of the three hundred or so I
currently publish. Of course, if making money were my primary
motivation for indexing online content, I would probably start up a Web
Directory like the aforementioned Seven Seek and charge for website
submissions.While I don't know how Seven Seek is doing financially,
charging for website submissions is a proven business model that has
worked on a large scale for Yahoo! and LookSmart and on a smaller scale
for GoGuides and Best of the Web. Getting back to the subject implied
by the title of this post, if there is a failure inherent in the ODP
business model, it is the fact that ODP has no business model. Rather,
when Netscape acquired ODP for the sum of one million dollars back in
1999, it purchased the good will of the then nascent open content
indexing community.When Netscape acquired ODP, it almost seemed to make
sense, as Netscape had (a largely unearned) reputation for being a
good 'Netizen. However, when AOL acquired Netscape and gave away ODP's
content (albeit with bizarre and probably unenforceable licensing
restrictions), it made sense to do so in a different way: Business
sense. To wit, because AOL exercised editorial control over ODP
content, it was able to offer quid pro quo to professional content
providers like AOL and Rolling Stone. It also took the profit out of
LookSmart's bottom line as a content provider, thereby appearing to
eliminate a serious AOL competitor from growing and prospering.
However, when LookSmart turned the tables on AOL and offered to share
advertising revenue with its publishers, ODP became totally irrelevant
and has been ever since.My original purpose in founding XODP was to
point out the flaws in ODP and foster discussion about the future of
the Open Content Movement. Since that time, Wikipedia has deposed ODP
and rightfully claimed the mantle of that movement with a viable
business model that relies upon charitable donations. However, rather
than letting ODP die with dignity, AOL keeps ODP on public display in
its critical care unit, a sad state of affairs that will probably last
at least until the next ODP system crash occurs. In a perfect world,
the powers that be at Wikipedia would acquire ODP and make it a truly
open directory, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to
happen. As for the proprietors of the aforementioned Dmoz Sucks
website, I wish them well, and they are more than welcome to join XODP
and rant. However, I really can't be bothered to review their website
any deeper than their Home Page and offer a substantive opinion on it:
The fact that ODP sucks ain't news, and it hasn't been for quite some
time.
--
Posted By Internet Esquire to XODP Blog at 11/29/2007 10:18:00 AM
------=_Part_13593_10739426.1196361356982
Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
While Googling my byline a month or so ago to keep current on any recent go=
ssip about me, I stumbled upon <A href=3D"http://forums.digitalpoint.com/sh=
owthread.php?p=3D4460117">a thread at Digital Point</A> discussing the meri=
ts (or lack thereof) of the <A href=3D"http://www.dmozsucks.org/">Dmoz Suck=
s</A> website. One "Rezo," who is apparently (one of?) the proprietor(s) =
of the <A href=3D"http://www.sevenseek.com/">SevenSeek</A> web directory, p=
ointed out <A href=3D"http://dmoz.org/">Dmoz</A> (aka ODP) sucks (ambiguity=
intentional) and recommended browsing the eponymous Dmoz Sucks website; on=
e "nebuchadrezzar" followed up with a glowing reference of both me and XODP=
, closing with, "You guys should make yourselves known to [David Prenatt], =
he would probably give you a few pointers."<br /><br />Nebuchadrezzar also =
pointed out the fact that <A href=3D"http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/xod=
p/message/559">Jimbo Wales frequented XODP back in the day</A> and opined t=
hat XODP may have played a role in helping Jimbo avoid many of the pitfalls=
of ODP in creating <A href=3D"http://www.wikipedia.org/">Wikipedia</A>. I=
'd like to think that were true, but (knowing Jimbo) I doubt that he would =
acknowledge that XODP had any kind of profound impact on him or on Wikipedi=
a. Even so, Wikipedia is precisely the sort of open content community that=
I had hoped to inspire and/or create <A href=3D"http://www.traffick.com/st=
ory/06-2000-xodp.asp "> when I founded XODP</A>, and while I have my reserv=
ations about Wikipedia, they are minor ones, and I make a point of extollin=
g the virtues of Wikipedia from time to time on XODP and elsewhere.<br /><b=
r />I first came across Jimbo Wales during my tenure as Chief Evangelist at=
the-late-and-never-that-great Wherewithal. Much to my surprise, Jimbo had=
a distant history with one of Wherewithal's founders, and there was some t=
alk of licensing Wherewithal's ad serving technology to Jimbo's company <A =
href=3D"http://www.bomis.com/">Bomis</A>. At the time, my stock as an Inte=
rnet celebrity was very high because of XODP, which is how I and Wherewitha=
l first came to Jimbo's attention. At the time, I was also consulting with=
<A href=3D"http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=3D104&STORY=
=3D/www/story/05-02-2000/0001207194&EDATE=3D">Project Napa</A> as their Chi=
ef Ontologist and Community Architect, and I also tried to sell them on the=
idea of serving up ads a la Wherewithal as a way of generating revenue for=
their open content people portal. However, both of these promising busine=
ss leads (and many others) were burned by Wherewithal's founders who simply=
did not have the wherewithal (pun intended) to put a profitable business d=
eal together. Consequently, I stopped bringing the leads to Wherewithal an=
d started operating in stealth mode, quietly playing matchmaker with my var=
ious business contacts while Wherewithal faded into obscurity.<br /><br />T=
he dot-com bubble had already begun to burst when I signed on at Wherewitha=
l and Project Napa, but I felt (and still feel) that there was (and still i=
s) quite a bit of promise in the area of open content generation and indexi=
ng. Even now I think that the ideas underlying Wherewithal and Project Nap=
a were sound, and I've long toyed with the idea of reincarnating both of th=
em in some form. Instead, I have focused on the needs of my paying clients=
; occasionally, I have worked on various <A href=3D"http://www.xodp.org/abo=
ut.html">XODP Web Guides</A> and contributed to Wikipedia to satisfy my inn=
ate need to index online content.<br /><br />In addition to satisfying my i=
nnate need to index online content, the XODP Web Guides have allowed me to =
demonstrate "proof of concept." And but for the fact that I am making a de=
cent living as <A href=3D"http://www.netesq.com/about.html">an Internet con=
sultant for attorneys</A>, work that I truly enjoy, I would embrace the opp=
ortunity to make more money by publishing XODP Web Guides while also improv=
ing the quality of online content indexing. Indeed, there may yet come a d=
ay when an investor throws so much money at me that I will take the necessa=
ry time and effort to hire and train enough staff to publish and maintain t=
housands (or even tens of thousands) of XODP Web Guides instead of the thre=
e hundred or so I currently publish. Of course, if making money were my pr=
imary motivation for indexing online content, I would probably start up a W=
eb Directory like the aforementioned Seven Seek and charge for website subm=
issions.<br /><br />While I don't know how Seven Seek is doing financially,=
charging for website submissions is a proven business model that has worke=
d on a large scale for <A href=3D"https://ecom.yahoo.com/dir/submit/intro/"=
>Yahoo!</A> and <A href=3D"http://www.looksmart.com/">LookSmart</A> and on =
a smaller scale for <A href=3D"http://www.goguides.org/">GoGuides</A> and <=
A href=3D"http://botw.org/">Best of the Web</A>. Getting back to the subje=
ct implied by the title of this post, if there is a failure inherent in the=
ODP business model, it is the fact that ODP has no business model. Rather=
, when <A href=3D"http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/xodp/message/1832">Net=
scape acquired ODP for the sum of one million dollars back in 1999</A>, it =
purchased the good will of the then nascent open content indexing community=
.<br /><br />When Netscape acquired ODP, it almost seemed to make sense, as=
Netscape had (a largely unearned) reputation for being a good 'Netizen. H=
owever, when AOL acquired Netscape and gave away ODP's content (albeit with=
bizarre and probably unenforceable licensing restrictions), it made sense =
to do so in a different way: Business sense. To wit, because AOL exercise=
d editorial control over ODP content, it was able to offer <I>quid pro quo<=
/I> to professional content providers like AOL and Rolling Stone. It also =
took the profit out of LookSmart's bottom line as a content provider, there=
by appearing to eliminate a serious AOL competitor from growing and prosper=
ing. However, when LookSmart turned the tables on AOL and offered to share=
advertising revenue with its publishers, ODP became totally irrelevant and=
has been ever since.<br /><br />My original purpose in founding XODP was t=
o point out the flaws in ODP and foster discussion about the future of the =
Open Content Movement. Since that time, Wikipedia has deposed ODP and righ=
tfully claimed the mantle of that movement with a viable business model tha=
t relies upon charitable donations. However, rather than letting ODP die w=
ith dignity, AOL keeps ODP on public display in its critical care unit, a s=
ad state of affairs that will probably last at least until the next ODP sys=
tem crash occurs. In a perfect world, the powers that be at Wikipedia woul=
d acquire ODP and make it a truly open directory, but I wouldn't hold my br=
eath waiting for that to happen. As for the proprietors of the aforementio=
ned Dmoz Sucks website, I wish them well, and they are more than welcome to=
join XODP and rant. However, I really can't be bothered to review their w=
ebsite any deeper than their Home Page and offer a substantive opinion on i=
t: The fact that ODP sucks ain't news, and it hasn't been for quite some t=
ime.
<br><br>--<br>
Posted By Internet Esquire to <a href=3D"http://blog.xodp.org/2007/11/th=
is-just-in-odp-still-sucks.html">XODP Blog</a> at 11/29/2007 10:18:00 AM
------=_Part_13593_10739426.1196361356982--
--0-1509495881-1196362116=:64053--
|
Internet Esquire <blog@...>
dfpjd
 Offline
 Send Email
|
Internet Esquire <netesq@...>
netesq@...
Send Email
|
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
