I don't think a generic web directory is very worthwhile these days. We are still keeping the old Open Directory Project going, now at curlie.org. But, now it is owned by one person who has their own idea of what matters. Software seems to matter more than getting people involved or helping them find it (again, or ever). One way or another I think the old directory is a bygone thing. Although I still like working on it and still (for some reason) can't leave it behind, I don't believe it is important any more.

But, I do think a list of links, better to think of it as a list of resources, about a specific topic, is a good thing and very useful. So I am still keeping and building my links for urban exploration and ASCII art and a few other things.

I have found that just an HTML list of links is a bit iffy. For some reason they end up a mess almost every time I have tried. Unless it is a very short list, three or so links. Larger lists seem to get muddled with HTML and one link gets the URL of another link and the original URL is lost, until you hunt for it again. It's frustrating. So I am using software, which has its own little battles and hurdles.

Here is my current list of useful software for keeping a list of resources (or web directory), specifically for WordPress and ClassicPress sites.

Link Library - I've tried others, may others, but I come back to Link Library. Not only is it steady, reliable and free to use (be kind and donate to support the plugin) but it brings out more features and is still in development and it works. It is huge when you first load it and try to work your way around. There is some help at GitHub, a wiki, which helps. Don't get discouraged or flustered, just keep working at it.

Simple Link Directory - I paid to use the pro version of this plugin. But, setting up links with categories is so confusing... I just wanted to stop spending so much time on just understanding how it works. I wasn't making progress, my links were sitting in text files waiting for me to add them but I kept having to add more categories that weren't categories because that's not how this works. Maybe its because I've worked in a web directory for so many years and got used to doing things in that way... but this never got simple for me.

Simple Links by Mat Lipe - This plugin is now closed, as of this month. I don't know why, likely assorted reasons. I still have my paid version. But, I never got it to set up my link lists the way I wanted them, even with the addons. It is a simpler plugin to work with than Link Library. If you can get, or still have, the paid version keep going with it.

Simple Link Library Plugin - Right now I'd say this is a back up plan. I did try it a little but it seemed to rely on the old core WordPress link plugin, which I already had. The screenshots look good and it says it has a broken link checker. It's one I'd keep a link around for.

Lastly, for people who keep lists of links I highly recommend Broken Link Checker. Although Link Library has this feature, others do not. Or, if you want to keep lists of links as regular posts to your site instead of using plugins, you really need something to help you keep track of which links have moved, changed, or bit the dust.

One source for Google search alternatives is alternativeTo. The listings come from people on the Internet, using sites, services, and software and deciding which they like to use best. (Of course, software developers, businesses, and marketers are also free to post on the site too). Overall, the alternativeTo site is not so popular that marketers have flooded it with junk. So, the site is a really good source for software reviews and alternatives to try.

**A few to get you started: **

• DuckDuckGo
• StartPage
• SearX

I've had so many ideas and from those ideas I spin off into making them reality and find even more options. More than I can keep track of. Software, it's advances, limitations and quickness to become obsolete/ unpopular, changes how you end up doing things. 

I wanted a web directory. But, keeping links became unpopular due to the SEO/ Google fanatics. WordPress and Joomla both stopped including their link management plugins/ extensions in the core software for the CMS. In the case of WordPress you can still download a plugin, Restore Lost Functionality, to bring back links and other features.  Joomla still offers Web Links as an extension, but further development seems very limited, if any.  

So, I could use Web Links with Joomla, I did upload and install it. But, I can't use it to import my links from WordPress. (I've noticed WordPress does not work well with other CMS). Also, there is no bookmarklet which I would have used to make keeping the web directory supplied with new links as I find them while using my web browser. Anyway, I spent a few days banging into road blocks with this and then I got the idea to change software. 

I did have PHPLD (PHP Link Directory), paid for it a few years ago. But, the support forums are gone. Possibly the software is no longer supported as I could not import my links even when I finally did manage to create a CSV file (which was frustrating in itself). There is an option to pull links in from ODP (but dmoz/ ODP is gone) and Google. This feature had an error and did not work. So, I have now ruled out PHPLD.

I've tried other web directory software, even considered other premium (not free) software. But, so many are old and seldom updated or lacking any support at all. I did upload, install and try several but they all had errors. Some would not even install at all. 

Now I'm looking at the idea of just creating pages of links. Not my preference, but, you have to work with the software (unless you know how to create your own, or can afford to pay someone to do it for you). 

There are page builders. I looked at lots of them when I was still using WordPress. Joomla also has a large amount of them. But, I'm not sure which are page builders, template makers, page editors, or something else similar with a different name. They seem to meld together and use the same description even when they say they can work as add-ons to each other. It's confusing. I don't like being confused. I think of myself as being an experienced web publisher. But, I am confused. 

Of course, none of them really have anything special for links. So, I can't say I'm eager to install any of them. It's a bit make-do at this stage.

Try this: Consider your website (or your computer if you don't have a site) and put together a FAQ (frequently asked questions) page all about your site. Don't forget a guide to how to use the site as well as the purpose for it being there. Study a few other FAQs to get ideas.

This is what I wrote as the new writing exercise for HerCorner. What do you think? Could you write a FAQ for your website? You should be able to. In theory at least, your site should have a theme, one main idea or purpose, right? So, it seems reasonable to expect a FAQ could be forthcoming.

Anyway, I like the idea. So tonight I am putting my fingers where my mouth is and I am creating a FAQ of my own for HerCorner. I might even do one for my personal site. But, I freely admit my personal site is not a great example of sticking with one idea.

So, getting down to the FAQ of it. What do you need to include in a FAQ? Likely you've read a few or skimmed them as I tend to do. Which is a good point, actually. Your FAQ should be skimmable when you get it into HTML. Do you know how to set up targets? Targets are those clickable points in the middle of a page. You can read a table of contents and find a clickable link to that exact section of the large body of content. If I sound like I'm gabbling send me an email and I will hunt out a link to demonstrate this target idea for you. Most FAQ's will use this, if you check for examples on your own.

Now, the meat of the matter. What does a FAQ need to include? I think the first thing is a statement of purpose. Someone reading this sentence (or short paragraph) should be able to understand what your site is about. But, this is a time to keep it simple. Just the basics. If it appeals to them they can dig into your FAQ for the details and specifics.

Next, explain the parts. Think basic and plan out what you really need people to know. Put it all into logical order, sort of a learn as you go thing. Read it back, try to think like someone who doesn't already know the answers. Did you miss anything?

Do your best, ask for feedback at the end and don't try to be some computer melded brain. It's almost certain you will leave something out that someone else will pick up on later. You are not the world's most perfect writer, you're just someone trying to be creative and share their FAQ with the world.

Now go get FAQ'ed!

People who think they know how to fix something should make sure they have the experience to understand how it worked before they judge it. I was annoyed to read a post about how to fix the problems with dmoz, The Open Directory Project on DirPopulus today. Here is what I wrote:

I read your Problems & Solutions. Some of what you have written about dmoz is incorrect and based on the viewpoint of someone who did not see how the directory worked in reality. Although I understand your biased point of view, it is annoying to read someone making incorrect assumptions and judging the directory I spent over ten years working on.

Looks like you are using the dmoz software, or something based on it. So, that won’t help me really. I don’t want to deal with that. We had volunteer editors trying to fix that, not staff. AOL decided to dump dmoz because no one there was interested in supporting it. For the last few years dmoz was run entirely by volunteers while the AOL staff forgot the directory existed. In the end they did not find any value in keeping it on their servers but they did feel the domain and the dmoz/ Open Directory name were worth holding onto.

The main directory, with some active editors, is being set up on Curlie. Other projects were started and discussed but that is the one which has the best chance of becoming active again. Most of the volunteers who worked on the old dmoz software went to Curlie and have been working on the updating the software.

As volunteers we did not send out notifications every time we reviewed, edited, or added a site to the directory. We were already running with few active editors so trying to send out notices for every submission would have meant the end of getting any reviews done. Waiting for three editors to approve (while good in some ways) would also mean submitted sites would take ages to be listed.

We did have bots checking links and moving them into unreviewed for volunteers to check the links. Some bots were able to check for things like the new http:// versus https:// so an editor just needed to verify the change and re-list the site. We also had bots which checked for general link rot and expired domains. These doubled the amount of links to be reviewed leaving editors which huge amounts of links waiting for attention. Also, dmoz had a feature giving people a chance to leave a note about their link, letting us know if a correction was needed. This was a very seldom used feature and yet the first thing I would check when I began reviewing links in a category. Often this was abused and suggested changes were about spam, deleting another site’s listing, or some other junk.

Also, we were able to check links with the Wayback Machine and Google’s archived version of the domain/ link. This was a good help in tracking down an old submission/ broken link. I often found broken links, one way or another. It was one of my favourite things to do.

Reviewing submitted links took hours, especially in categories involving businesses and, of those, anything involving marketing became so flooded with junk submissions it was too much for a volunteer editor to want to deal with. When I tried to work on these categories my computer slowed down to a crawl just trying to load the page with all the sites to be reviewed. It was aggravating to work there when most of the submissions were junk – the link was already listed and descriptions were full of keywords, CAPITAL LETTERS and so on. Of course, these are the very people who complained about dmoz and dmoz editors the most. They did not understand we were running as a directory for the public to search, not for businesses to be listed. The priority was not listing every business or service but to have resources for people searching for a business, service or information (with the Regional listings to help people find local resources).

There are duplicate listings for some sites because they fit into more than one place. Also, sites could be double listed in Regional and the topic or business. Once you get into organizing and deciding where sites (you call them resources) should go you will see it is a much more complicated project than it seems from the outside looking in. We had a forum just for ontology issues. Due to many opinions from active and inactive volunteers, making category changes was time consuming and tended to get lost along the way.

I wish you best of luck with your directory. But, you have a lot of years to go before you should judge how another directory was run.