4,596,440 sites
- Thread starter Jaswinder
- Start date
makrhod
Member
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,899
Hello jaswinder
Having read your posts here, I am guessing that you may not understand that this is a not a listing service, but a directory managed by volunteers who find sites in all sorts of places, not just the suggestions made by other people such as yourself.
Also, I hope you realise that repeated suggestions of a site are not only unnecessary, but can be counter-productive.
It also makes more work for volunteers if they have to keep moving the suggestion from inappropriate categories.
If you have suggested your site, thank you, and it will be reviewed in time. We just have no idea when, or by whom.
Having read your posts here, I am guessing that you may not understand that this is a not a listing service, but a directory managed by volunteers who find sites in all sorts of places, not just the suggestions made by other people such as yourself.
Also, I hope you realise that repeated suggestions of a site are not only unnecessary, but can be counter-productive.
It also makes more work for volunteers if they have to keep moving the suggestion from inappropriate categories.
If you have suggested your site, thank you, and it will be reviewed in time. We just have no idea when, or by whom.
Age of websites doesn't really matter. If you consider things like domain name changes, domain hijacks, etc., you'll realize it's really extremely difficult to tell how old a site really is. And editors don't try.
You know your site is five years old. Nobody else does.
Fortunately, nobody else _cares_. A site doesn't automatically get more important as it ages anyway. And if it did, I'm sure there are many sites older than that, which haven't been reviewed yet (not that we could necessarily find them, or recognize them when we did.)
All that matters is how much unique information is contained on a site, and how authoritative its source is--at the moment of review.
You know your site is five years old. Nobody else does.
Fortunately, nobody else _cares_. A site doesn't automatically get more important as it ages anyway. And if it did, I'm sure there are many sites older than that, which haven't been reviewed yet (not that we could necessarily find them, or recognize them when we did.)
All that matters is how much unique information is contained on a site, and how authoritative its source is--at the moment of review.
spectregunner
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2003
- Messages
- 8,768
It is possible that it is not listable. An amazing number of sites have virtually no useful content.