hutcheson

There are only four circumstances that might cause a delay in the review: 1) The category has no editor 2) The category has an editor that recently ceased to be active. 3) The category has an editor that is busy elsewhere 4) The category has an editor that has religious or other scruples against reviewing that site. There are only two circumstances under which a site can be reviewed: 1) The category has an editor 2) The category has no editor, but is being edited by an editall or an editor of a higher-level category. We haven't a clue when it'll happen.

>>I assume from your answer that the time for a site review que is entirely dependent on the individual editor regardless of how many sites are waiting. Yes, you should assume that. It's slightly more complicated (since editors in higher categories can edit in the subcategories) but that just gives the site more chances to be reviewed.

Because of the, um, hyperaggressive nature of some real-estate-site submitters, the ODP editors' guidelines are very strict about the number, location, and form of those listings. A real-estate agent's site can be listed in the locality where the office is, and no other. If (as is typical) an agent will work all over a metropolitan area, that fact can be mentioned in the description. I'm assuming that this is a Surrey-based agent working the Vancouver area?

No way. The editors, see, they don't do time clocks, and they don't post their schedules, and they don't take orders well either. You threaten to cut their paychecks, and they just giggle. We just try to treat them nice and hope they come back soon.

>And if it is somewhere else, will adding it to the unreviewed queue mean I have to start over again on the wait? No, it means it's waiting in two different queues. That means it will get reviewed twice for a listing, but not that it will probably get two listings.

it takes quite a bit of time a) filling out the boxes and b) finding sites that are not listed that could be listed in a particular category. Well, skimp on a). And b) is not time wasted. If you can find sites that are worth adding, and you do, you've done useful work. If you can't find any, then that category may not need an editor--try some other category. And if you could but don't want to, then you are one of those people (to be pitied but not condemned) who wouldn't enjoy editing anyway.

Not eligible for listing anywhere. Where the submittal guidelines read "affiliate sites," you should interpret this functionally from the perspective of the surfer -- that is, any other scheme that looks and acts the same way, such as MLM sites with online sales, will be TREATED the same way by editors.

It wasn't there, nor was there any evidence that it ever had been. I added to unreviewed. There's a very short queue, so I assume it's actively monitored, and you might reasonably hope for a listing soon. But that's a prediction, not a promise.

Why not start by asking for access to the Adult forum here? And then ask your question there.

Re: Status req: http://www.rosaries.divine-mother. You misunderstand the problem. You have a domain name, which contains a website. You should submit that site as http://www.divine-mother.com/ , and (since its primary content and focus is clearly on selling rosaries) it could be reviewed under the Rosaries Shopping category. The vanity-subdomain name is not only not a help to you, it's a positive hindrance. It jumps up and down saying "I'm a spammer! whack me with a mole!" It does that because there are a zillion idiot spammers out there, who submit the same URL with umpteen dozen different subdomains, all going to exactly the same page, and expect them all to get listed. And so you've carefully disguised your site as one of them. I don't think the editor should be blamed for properly rejecting the URL (or even for incorrectly assuming that, if you were like the spammer you appeard to be, you'd have submitted the main domain somewhere, and probably several times.) But (I actually checked) you apparently HADN'T done that. So resubmit, as the main domain, in the same category. I can't guarantee acceptance: I don't edit Catholic Jewelry, and (for all I know) the site may be a mirror of jewelled-marks-of-the-beast.com. But, on the face of it, it looks like a site selling Catholic Jewelry, and in the absence of the red-herring subdomain, I don't see why it shouldn't get a fair review.

Aargh! Shoot your webmaster, and replace him with a gerbil. It's brighter, and you can wire up its exercise wheel to keep your server running during a brownout.

>i seem to be tarred with a general brush of spam..simply because it seems your are now guilty untill proven innocent. Guilty? We don't do the juridicial thing. We just, um, list websites. Websites may be illegal or legal -- we mostly don't try to judge that. They may be good or evil -- each editor chooses something good to do, and leaves the evil for someone else. They may have content or not: now THAT we judge. No-content = unlistable, and yes, every site is unlistable until proven otherwise (by a search of the site resulting in some unique content.) Editors' judgment isn't perfect, so we have places like this forum, where you can question that judgment (and your -- this IS a personal pronoun -- questions, at least in part, have resulted in some improvement, if not yet the changes you were most interested in). And the issue isn't closed yet: the editors are volunteers, and this is not the only open issue. A little patience, a little understanding of what constitutes relevant detail (which is part of what people have been trying to explain), a lot of carving away of irrelevant detail, and we'll make progress.

In such a case, we would typically list the main corporate site (which, if it was created by an honest and competant designer, will contain links to all its product- and locale-specific content, no matter what domain name it uses as address) with a description that mentions the relevant product lines.

I probably should have phrased my remarks differently. I usually try very hard not to use the second personal pronoun and "spam" in the same sentence, so that I can address the general issue in the light of our editor experience. And, despite the personal pronoun, I really was thinking in the general, not the specific case. We have seen, and continue to see, spammeisters who build cookie-cutter sites for one city after another, with a sentence or two of "local information", and deeplinks to lots and lots of profitable affiliate programs -- florists, hotel reservations, etc, etc, etc. Some of them at least show the deeplinks honestly. But more and more of these cyanobacteria, knowing they've well worn their welcome out, go to great lengths to conceal the nature of the site ownership and affiliate links. This is probably the single largest source of spam in the Regional categories. So, when experienced editors see a content-lite "city directory", they simply and automatically wonder which of the poisoned-cookie-cutter spammers it belongs to. A loss for people who are just beginning to build up a "fan site" for their hometown; a loss for surfers and directory builders. Another way of putting it is that the spammers are systematically doing their dead-level best to destroy the value of the internet for everyone, and are certainly having more success at that than they could be at any task that requires room-temperature IQ or alley-cat morals.

>With it taking several months to get into the open directory, its little wonder that sites are submitting before they are completed. The fact is that it DOESN'T take several months to get into the directory. It takes an AVERAGE of several months to be REVIEWED. I'd say a solid 5-10% of sites are reviewed within 48 hours! (And another 1-5% may take 18 months or more.) Remember also that a site may be reviewed several times, especially if submitted to an obviously wrong category -- as the majority of submittals are! It is precisely the arrogant fools who think the submittal guidelines don't apply to them, who are MOST likely to submit to OBVIOUSLY wrong categories, where the editors QUICKLY review them to get them out of the way (sending them elsewhere for the real review. No, we're not surprises to find a lot of people doing foolish, rude, and counterproductive submittals. For the idiots who are at least trainable, we have the guidelines and the forum.

The mistake you made is common. I would not penalize it, and I'd write a stiff note to an editor who did. But we would love to see that mistake made less often.

Just guessing that the answer is "no" and "yes", respectively, but even assuming an answer of "no-squared", that's IMO _way_ below what we'd call "_adequate_" unique content....and if you submitted sites or pages with no more unique content than that separately for as many as three or four cities, we'd DEFINITELY call it "lowballing spam".

Your guess is good, and your questions are good, and if we had a good answer for them, we wouldn't be still trying to figure out what to do with such categories (as you say, there are many of them.)

It looks like a "lead generator" site -- that is, one that takes information. We list sites that give information. We can't review data collectors (because we can't see what is done with data given them); by definition, taking information can't be "unique content." -- you can give information to anyone, even your gossipy neighbor! This is a staff ruling, not just the whim of a "higher editor", and is unlikely to change.

>Do you mean that someone at the ODP can fix this problem? >Or, if the RDF Dump is successful... that will fix the problem? When Google picks up a successful, up-to-date RDF dump, the problem will vanish.

No review yet. Both categories are pretty backlogged, and hard-pressed by stealth affiliate spam. No promises, but be prepared to expect long delays.

Yes, what he said was tantamount to a suggestion that you resubmit.

>The choice is yours. This in no way affects your listing at the ODP. True. (Our only business is to mention what kind of data it is, so people without the capacity or desire for that kind of data know to not visit the site.)

I am not a lawyer, but, in technical knowledge, the average lawyer ranks somewhere between a luddite and a lugnut. So I'm not going to comment on the legal issues involved, but there are some facts that need to be clearly understood in order to make a reasoned judgment . So, next time you call your lawyer asking if the ODP has been guilty of "restraint of trade" in not listing your site as expeditiously or promoting it as fulsomely as your greedy heart desired, you might mention some facts. -- The Open Directory explicitly does not promise to list all sites. In fact, it explicitly reserves the right to NOT-list a site for various reasons, including simply a violation of the submittal guidelines. -- The Open Directory does not sustain a business relationship with submitters. It solicits help finding websites, and promises to use that help -- if in fact it is constructive and not pestilential. -- The Open Directory does not have a monopoly of general-purpose directories: two of the largest portals have their own directories (Yahoo and MSN/Looksmart); and there are many other "vertical" directories for particular geographic regions or business types. -- Portals that license the Open Directory are explicitly free to modify ODP content in any way, including adding or deleting sites. The ODP does not place any technical or legal constraints on their adding any particular site to any particular category. -- Most surfers use search engines rather than directories to find businesses. -- There is no search engine that possesses a monopoly. Google and Inktomi are the largest search engines, and neither one is in the position to place artificial barriers to new entrants. -- Open Directory data is not directly entered into Inktomi, which has its own site submittal system. -- The Open Directory data is directly entered into Google, but it has no monopoly (or even really, privileged place) on Google site submittal: Google's spider, direct site submittal, and Yahoo provide alternate ways for any site to get into Google. -- Most portals provide targeted paid advertising ABOVE whatever search engine or directory results they display. The Open Directory has no control or effect whatsoever on that channel. Now, if you have a business, we do want to list it. Not because we care whether you or one of your competitors gets any particular customer, but because we want the Open Directory to be comprehensive. We do take pride in what the Open Directory contributes to the quality of portals and search engines. And we do take pride in the significant economic pressure the mere presence of a content-rich alternative puts on, say, Looksmart. But the ODP isn't Microsoft or Qualcomm or even the Devil, and it doesn't have the power to restrain your trade. You don't want to contribute to the sum of human knowledge? You want to chase the same round of rich readers with the same slim packet of porn photos? You want to build-or-buy a Hotel Directory Website with Online Reservations? Go ahead. We can't stop you, and we won't try. But we may not have time in our busy schedules to give you the kind of free promotion you want. So just make sure your business plan includes obtaining whatever such services you need, from whomever you wish to hire. In fact, even if you have a real business providing unique goods and services, you will not be able to afford to depend on the Open Directory for all your website promotion needs. (It's not Santa Claus either.)

The site is In My Express Opinion, not appropriate for a Business listing. It is a retail outlet for consumers, and as such belongs in Shopping. If you have a storefront where people can walk in and buy things, then you should make sure the website mentions it, then (please!) submit the site to the appropriate Locality category in Regional.