I see sites rank well that aren't in DMOZ, or Yahoo, or Best of the Web, or the other stalwart directories.

The way I see it, though, is that every little bit helps. Even though many sites in DMOZ are defunct, the fact that a credible human using set standards reviewed the site before inclusion has to count for something. Same with Yahoo, although I'm sure the $300 helps grease the slide.

>the fact that a credible human using set standards reviewed the site before inclusion has to count for something

if that was the case with dmoz, I'm sure, dmoz would be much more valued by users, webmasters and search engines. fact is, most dmoz-editors are webmasters and have sites in the categories they edit. of course, nobody likes competition. there's a slight conflict of interest, but hey, it's "open", so who cares.

I've never (and I really mean _never_) seen dmoz refer a single visitor to a site I was working on. Sure, they're somewhat important to google, allthough I believe that their importance is decreasing. I've just had a client who wanted her page SEOed. Didn't get her into dmoz because a well known local competitor is the editor and won't allow his competitors in, but got her to page 1 anyhow (google maps / local search: #1, regular serps #2), allthough I wasn't expeciting that, since there are a few pages which are pretty good and have quite a few powerful links.

I've just recently gotten my coveted DMOZ link after waiting something stupid like 2 years for the pleasure. I *am* seeing traffic from it, though the volumes are quite small.

It's definitely not the definitive SEO magic trick, but I'm sure it does *something*.

I think 3 in a month is the most ive seen.