beebware

I see nothing rude or offensive about dfy's reply. He said and I quote: >> " If you're losing money, it's down to your own site design" << (emphasis mine) in response to your statement earlier >> Your decision is costing us a lot of money. <<. >> are one of the top swimwear sites on the web and have been around for many years << Earliest reference to your site that I can find is August 2000 btw (although this is getting offtopic). >> rather than look into the situation. << dfy *has* looked into the situation, so have I. I wouldn't be surprised if other editors have as well (including the editor that originally decided that http://dmoz.org/Shopping/Clothing/Casual/ was the proper place for your site). Calm down, count to 10 and accept the decision. Getting yourself worked up and starting to insult editors (by implying that they are making snide comments et al) will not assist you in anyway.

Your site is still awaiting review for that category, unfortently with nearly 1000 other sites. It *will* be sometime before your site is listed. [added later] Aaargghhhh! I just looked at the unreviewed queue for that category with the aim of trying to reduce it a little bit by removing obvious spam etc etc. I don't think *any* category has scared me so much before. I can't tell the spam, mirror links etc etc from the real content (especially concerning the subject matter). I have a feeling it could be several months before any editor can pluck up enough courage to attack a category like that...

>> Your decision is costing us a lot of money. << *sigh*. I wish people would keep the subject of money out of these forums. I'll quote myself from another thread:

Technical problems have been plaguing the ODP servers for the last month (resulting in a large amount of downtime) and have only just got under control. However, due to this - several things are backlogged, the search database generation system being one of them. Please be reassured that the Staff @ ODP are aware of this issue and are working it fix it, but several more items need to be 'cleared' before hand ("public page generation" being one of them). IIRC, Staff are concentrating on getting the RDF dumps working correctly as a matter of urgency so that users can use a data partner such as Google to search whilst the reminder of the issues are sorted. The search database is normally generated at least once a week, but I would personally guess it won't be updated for another week to a fortnight. No "official" ETA at the moment.

It's been moved to World/Deutsch/Wirtschaft/Verkehr und Logistik/Speditionen as per your request.

From the Forum Guidelines - READ BEFORE POSTING which is ALWAYS at the top of this forum: Without the category you submitted to, we are unable to give you any information about your submission(s).

If you contact me with the details about the alledged abuse, I'll pass them onto netas that I know are working in that area of the directory. We do take allegations of abuse very seriously, but sometimes people do see abuse where there isn't any...

Ok, let's get this right: * The editor did reject your site, but we are unable to tell you what the reason was. We are covered by a code of privacy (see also this forums guidelines). In this occasion it was because the note left by the editor for reason of deletion was not detailed enough to provide any information of use to a public forum. * >> you seem to think he did it on purpose because he thought it was spam <<. I mearly offered it as a possibility for the deletion, and even then I put it could have been an accidental deletion. * >> editor thought it was an affiliate reseller site <<. That'll be me <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> To an untrained eye (i.e. one not familar with this particular Shopping category), it does appear that you are merely a direct affiliate/reseller of AT&T Wireless and offer nothing in addition to their service. A quick check shows that your physical location gives me the indication of a 'mail-drop' address (even though it may not be). The description of an 'affiliate' is shown in the ODP guidelines as including >> For example, sites which sell products or services provided by another company and make a small margin on the sale are affiliate mirrors << Apart from that, I have nothing really more to add than hutcheson said above - especially regarding your boss. [add] Actually, I just recalled that I do have a little bit more to add. If you go to the 'Add URL' page of ODP (which is displayed before you can add a site) you'll see the section marked "Editorial Discretion". I quote from that paragraph: >> You should not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. <<. If you have put your job at risk by guaranteeing a placement in the ODP, well, welcome to the realms of unemployment - but don't blame the ODP for it.

We do allow for differences in spelling, but it depends on where you are editing. Most of the directory is American spelling, but areas such as Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/ use the good old original British spelling of English words, Regional/Oceania/Australia/ uses the Oz versions and the less said about Regional/North_America/Canada/ the better, eh? Of course, World/ is an entirely different ball-game with all sorts of exotic spellings and word formations (so much so, it seems they write different languages there). To be honest with you, once you've spent a while on the internet, flicking between US-b---t-dised English and the proper thing is as easy as shelling peas. Plus we have things like the Preferred Terms list which help maintain a 'house-style'. If you do become an editor, you'll soon get to grips with things like that: we have internal forums similar to this from which editors can get assistance, documentation details (editor side and 'semi-public' like the guidelines) which help and, of course, you can contact other editors for assistance.

Ok, I've familiarised myself with that category a bit more now (I personally avoid the Shopping/ branch if I can). It does appear that similar sites to yours are listed there, therefore I'm not quite sure why your site was rejected (there wasn't an explanation for its rejection that's why I wrote *probably*). You can try resubmitting and seeing if it is accepted this time - it might have just got muddled up in a load of spam and got deleted by accident. And don't worry about faxing the agreement - it won't be neccessary <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> We aren't the internet police (and don't pretend to be), we just check a site to ensure it meets the guidelines - not whether everything is all "above board".

It was deleted from that queue on the 28th September. It looks like it was probably deleted as it seems to be an affiliate reseller site for AT+T Wireless (see "For example, sites which sell products or services provided by another company and make a small margin on the sale are affiliate mirrors.").

No part of ODP lists sites that consist mainly of affiliate content - see the section entitled 'Sites Consisting Primarily of Affiliate Links'. >> I may after a long period of time be able to meet the guidelines, probably years. Any suggestions? << Wait until your site complies with the guidelines (and the adult guidelines if you want your site listed in Adult/ and *then* submit. Otherwise your site will keep on being rejected (as the editor will follow the guidelines) and you may eventually end up being labelled a spammer.

Your site is still awaiting review with around a 100 other sites. There was a site added on the 14th October (which caused the page to update), but this site was by a senior editor from another category to this one (as it was more appropriate). Please don't treat the 'last update' date at the bottom of the page as 'Last time the unreviewed queue was cleared' date - as it isn't. Pages are "regenerated" for various reasons: sites are added/deleted from that category (for example, some editors just 'hunt down' sites which are 'red-flagged' as reporting errors), sub-categories are updated (which may cause the 'parent category' to be likewise updated), related category/@ links/foreign language links added/removed, category descriptions updated - even an editor deciding to make changes in their profile can cause some pages to be regenerated. I would think it is unlikely that your site will be listed within the next 30 days (given the queue length). But that an educated guesstimate: it could be shorter or it could be many many times longer.

It should be showing up in that category in the next few days (public page generation is currently backlogged).

Capitalisation in the ODP URL is important (as the server is case sensitive). http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Government/Defence/ is the proper cut'n'pasted URL. The queue there is extremely small at the moment (a couple of sites), but it could still be some time before your site is reviewed. If you can suggest a description for your site, please private message me and I'll add it to the site while it is still in unreviewed. At the moment there isn't a description for the site, so any potential editor would have to spend a little bit longer reviewing the site. If, however, it's got the basics about the site in the description 'Photos, contact details and background information about XYZ - the home of ABC', then the editor can just 'tweak' the description to comply with the guidelines instead of having to think of an entirly new description. Of course, if the description is 'keyword-stuffed' or doesn't describe the site at all, the editor will then delete the description and have to write one themselves anyway: but will be a little bit annoyed at the wasted time.

Listing times for any category range from a few minutes to several months (however, at the moment, "public page generation" is currently massively backlogged so if you were listed today, it may take several days to show up). We are unable to give a precise time for listings: however, we are able to advice you if there is a large backlog in the cateogry you have submitted to (there is no backlog in the above categories).

http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Employment/IT_and_Computers/Advice/ does sound appropriate to your site (and maybe http://dmoz.org/Society/Work/Self-Employment/United_Kingdom/ ).

Which category did you submit to? Without knowing the category, we are unable to give a status on any submission (see the Forum Guidelines - READ BEFORE POSTING item 2). However, I can tell you it was deleted from the unreviewed queue inBusiness/Industries/Information_Technology/Employment/Recruiters/ as your site is not a employment recruiter site.

http://www.kp24.com.au/process.html has been awaiting review since 17/October/2002. It is still quite early to be asking about its status. Please allow 3 weeks (at a minimum) to elapse before checking again.

Re: status http://www.heavenlytreasures.com/ [201] It's still awaiting review there (all on its lonesome). An editor will get round to it soone, but because of recent downtime editors have not been able to edit and are only just getting back into the 'swing' of things.

Pass. But by looking at the message you received, the connection between your machine and the ODP server failed for some reason. This could be due to network traffic (i.e.: if you are on dialup, your connection could have dropped or your link to the internet might have gone down shortly), temporary server unavailability (i.e. Netscape techs rebooting the box). Or... it could also be related to the widespread DDoS DNS problems encountered Monday evening (GMT) - but your machine should have cached the DNS entry anyway...

Your site is already awaiting review in Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Government/Defence/ . It was added by another editor yesterday.

I've approved the change (even though I don't read Dutch, I could see the 'New URL' placement etc). Due to server problems, however, it could take a few days for the change to become visable.

Ooops, my bad <img src="/images/icons/blush.gif" alt="" /> My excuse is that ODP was going a bit slow at the time, therefore I just relied on the notes attached to the site which told me it had already been listed in the other category. It failed it indicate that it still needed 'final approval'.