Are directories rejected?

I've seen in this forum that some ODP's editors claim that sites listing links to other sites are rejected because they do not bring anything new (under the assumption that they copy content from other sites). By this token, directories would not be accept in... specially as/when there is no category suitable for them in the ODP.

It seems unfair since directories may go along with the spirit of the ODP itself... that is, a cooperative network, edited by editors...

Directories will have a harder time to get listed, unless they bring some unique extra features. There is no point listing a directory of web sites, when we can just go ahead and list each of those web sites as individual entries. It just introduces redundancy.

Oh dear, then you'd be stealing content from other sites. That's not very nice. In certain cases, you'd have to copy an awful lot and even create categories which are not listed on the ODP...

>..., then you'd be stealing content from other sites. That's not very nice. In certain cases, you'd have to copy an awful lot ...

Um, let's avoid accusations of criminal behavior here, shall we? And anyway, in THIS country (and I suspect even in most other civilized countries) a directory doesn't and can't very well own someone ELSE's URL, now, can it? Or ... you have a contract that says the webmasters can't permit anyone else to link to them, and you don't realize that such a contract can't be enforced against any other webmaster anywhere? I really don't know where you're coming up with this, but I think it's from an alternate reality I'd not want even to visit.

>...and even create categories which are not listed on the ODP...

OOH! tempting, very tempting! There isn't anything in the ODP that's much more fun than that, as any active editor will tell you.

For small directories, "sucking out the juice and spitting out the husk" is without a doubt the best thing to do for the surfer. And it is also obviously the best thing to do for the websites represented in the other directory.

So ... when someone sets up a directory, allegedly to promote OTHER websites, but gets their knickers in a knot because someone else wants to help them promote those same websites, it is hard (OK, it's flat impossible) not to assume malicious ulterior motives. If those websites aren't worth listing, then why were they listed? If they were worth listing, then why shouldn't someone else list them? And how could anyone not be happy that their service to their customers (whether surfers or webmasters) has resulted in additional benefit to those customers?

OK, maybe the ODP approach is so different from your attitude that there's no way to even talk. There are certainly folk who think the ODP is plotting to take over the world, because that's what they'd be doing. And there's no way to tell them any different.

I am basing my comments on a specific directory which is so huge that I doubt that it can be easily copied. The fact is that:

you receive so many submissions that you seldom have the time to evaluate them properly. This is specially true when they include a huge amount of content as happens in the case of directories.

But copying from other directories would be unfeasible... considering that you already receive a huge ammount of submissions....

I think you fear competitors...

Why would you think directories aren't listed (assuming they have unique content)?

http://www.dmoz.com/Computers/Internet/Searching/Directories/

Well, it all depends on what one understands by unique content. Look at this please: www.brazilink.org. It seems to be the basis for my being rejected as an editor. I profoundly disagree with this rejection - if not me becoming an editor but at least this site being accepted - because this site contains:

1) many categories/thematic areas which are not listed on the ODP
2) websites and articles (see e-library in very thematic page - something which the ODP has not)
3) is humanly selected (by teachers and updated by students)

I also found out that http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=lanic&all=yes&cs=UTF-8&cat=Science/Directories
includes Lanic several times, including as directories to countries such as El Salvador, Mexico...

I really don't understand your criteria. If you accept Lanic, should by the same token, accept Brazilink. Yet not.
Seems to be more a case of some of your editors not spending much time reviewing Brazilink which has a huge amount of content.
If you could possibly explain this different criteria for inclusion of one and not the other...

The problem is - and it's been pointed out a few times - the category you applied for is not acceptable for that link. If you are unable to find links that are acceptable for the category you apply for, then your application will be rejected.

It has nothing to do with whether or not that particular link would fit somewhere in the ODP - it doesn't fit in that one category - period.

You are more than welcome to submit that website - one time only - to the best category for that website - which isn't http://dmoz.org/Regional/South_America/Brazil/News_and_Media/ BTW.

Why editors cannot say so clearly? Why do they make games and waste their own time and other people's?

I have just submited the site in question because I believe it's great work and deserves to be listed. It's unique and offer quality resources, besides being continuously updated - not broken links found while surfing it.

But am terribly disapointed with your colleagues and fear they will end up bringing down this project.

I also think that because I am Brazilian I should be able to judge the value of sites related to my country better than foreigners.

Best regards

fear they will end up bringing down this project.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about that - they are all very experienced and articulate editors.

temacha5, an editor did tell you so, in this thread four days ago. (The fourth item in that thread). I understand that you are annoyed, but you must also realise that it is somewhat frustrating for us to have to repeat the same information to the same people over and over again.

I fear we have a communication problem and are going in circles. I do not believe that anyone at any time said that the site would be rejected. To be rejected, someone would have to review it, and no-one here is doing that. Eventaully someone will, and it will be rejected or acepted at that time.

I pointed out only that directories have to be better than just plain sites in order to get accepted.

Others have pointed out that the category you suggest was the wrong category.

As far as your accusations of stealing, that's like saying you cannot copy my address, since it's already listed in the phone book.

I've had a directory submitted to me, where less than 25% if the links worked. Of the ones that did, perhaps 90% were already listed in ODP. It would do no-one a service to list such a directory [except perhaps the web-designer who created such a mess]. However, since there were some links there that worked and were not already listed, I chose to list those sites. That's not stealing, that's research. It's like going to the library, looking though bibliographies in books, finding those books, and then in turn listing them in the bibliography of my book - normal academic research.

temacha5, an editor did tell you so, in this thread four days ago. (The fourth item in that thread).

Click to expand...

And again in #15, and #25. temacha5, you need to start actually reading what people are writing.