Average Review Time

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone knew how long it takes for a site to be reviewed on average.

I understand that this is mostly voluntary work and different sections of the directory are handled differently and it takes different amount of time to get listed in different sections.

But course its not like a section is not looked into for a year or so. So i guess what I am asking is that, is there a ball park figure or period range as to how long it takes for a site to be reviewed after which i would know that its either accepted or not and I should stop checking back.

I do want to add that i think the work being done on the directory is impressive and i can understand the amount of time and effort it takes to maintain something like that and it must not be easy.

Thank you.

adeelarshad82 said:

I was wondering if anyone knew how long it takes for a site to be reviewed on average.

Click to expand...

There is not such a thing as "average time to be reviewed"

I understand that this is mostly voluntary work and different sections of the directory are handled differently and it takes different amount of time to get listed in different sections.

Click to expand...

It even takes different times for suggested websites in the same category (what you call sections).

But course its not like a section is not looked into for a year or so.

Click to expand...

Sorry to tell but it is not uncommon for a category not to be looked at for a year or more.

adeelarshad82 said:

Hi,

But course its not like a section is not looked into for a year or so. So i guess what I am asking is that, is there a ball park figure or period range as to how long it takes for a site to be reviewed after which i would know that its either accepted or not and I should stop checking back.

Click to expand...

I have been monitoring one thread on this forum where one guy has been politely asking the following question:

"I was wondering when my website submission will be assessed?"

He asks the same question, once every three months on the dot and never gets any reply other than the following:]

"Your request is in progress."

OR

Something really simple:

"Awaiting Approval."

Click to expand...

Do you know, I would have given up by now. However, this guy is just patient and I think that mabe this isjust the way you need to approach the ODP.

Ask, politely, over and over for a year or more and you stand a chance of **possibly** being included.

I guess it's just a game of chance really... Be honest & persistent & contact the editor(s) for that category... and you may get included.

Contacting an editor will not change review times. Most editors won't respond because some have been threatened and harassed.

I have been monitoring one thread on this forum where one guy has been politely asking the following question:

"I was wondering when my website submission will be assessed?"

He asks the same question, once every three months on the dot and never gets any reply other than the following:]

"Your request is in progress."

OR

Something really simple:

"Awaiting Approval."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Clearly the thread you're talking about has nothing to do with a web site suggestion since we haven't given information about site suggestion statuses since 2005. I'm guessing that the thread is about an application to become an editor, and that's not comparable to suggesting your site.

avera said:

Ask, politely, over and over for a year or more and you stand a chance of **possibly** being included.

Click to expand...

Certainly not.
1) Asking that question here is forbidden by our guidelines.
2) Anthing that happens here will have no effect on the review of a website, nor on the time it will take before the review will be done
3) Repeating the same question over and over again is annoying.

I guess it's just a game of chance really... Be honest & persistent & contact the editor(s) for that category... and you may get included.

Click to expand...

Editors are advised never to answer such emails.
And they certainly will not act because some person wants a prefered treatment. Such a persistent behaviour might even backfire. The editor might get annoyed enough that he will never review the website.

So people please do not follow this foulish advise.
The only thing you need to do is suggest a website ONCE.
You can start to wait and look if your website is listed as often as you want but for me it seems a waste of time and effort to do so. There are many more things you can do. All not related to DMOZ and all are more usefull.

There are some aspects of the Open Directory that AREN'T anything like chance.

Most sites on the web are absolutely not eligible for a listing at all. There's no chance of them ever being listed. And most of the people who are browsing around from oracle to oracle trying to discover the secret of "getting listed", are wasting their time (and worse, wasting the editors' time, which is actually worth something.) For those people, bugging the editor, politely or allegedly politely, won't increase their chances. Waiting, patiently or impatiently, won't increase their chances. Suggesting, once or a zillion times, won't increase their chances. Zero remains zero.

But there are other aspects that ARE like chance.

If two sites are both eligible for a listing, there's no predicting which one will be reviewed and listed first. Think of it like a lottery--the editors are constantly drawing tickets out of the bowl. A good position in Google is like putting one ticket in the bowl. One ODP site suggestion is like putting one ticket in. Putting the URL on your tradesman's van, Yellow Pages, or other advertising in the real world -- they're all tickets. And the bowl isn't emptied at the end of the day. Undrawn tickets remain in the lottery for the next day.

To make the analogy better, each "subject" has a different part of the bowl (although the boundaries aren't firm, and tickets drift around a bit). And each editor chooses what part of the bowl to draw from. (Some parts of the bowl are filled with horse droppings or toxic pellets, and editors stay away from them, or pick at them carefully with tongs. And some parts attract editors. If a site is providing information, no matter how esoteric, which is hard to find on the web, then editors will want to find and list it quickly. If a site is promoting a business, no matter how widely used, then its attractiveness is dependent on other criteria: such as how easy it is to verify the business really exists and doesn't already have a dozen other websites operating under other alibis.)

Even for eligible sites, it's very very important that editors make sure that bugging the editor won't improve chances! (Otherwise, people waste their time and our patience bugging the editors.) On the other hand, waiting gives more chances (thus increasing the accumulative chances) as more tickets get drawn.

pvgool said:

It even takes different times for suggested websites in the same category (what you call sections).

Click to expand...

By sections I meant categories.

I read somewhere that if you submit to the right category which has a small number of listings and is not so popular, chances of being included are not only higher but inclusion will happen much faster.

But like pvgool said

pvgool said:

Sorry to tell but it is not uncommon for a category not to be looked at for a year or more.

Click to expand...

So if that small and not so popular category is not looked into for over a year then I take it chances of being included are not greater nor faster.

Anyway, appreciate your help.

Thank you

Well, the actual percentages might be of some interest to people who are evaluating the effectiveness of various category-building strategies. But for people suggesting their own site, the percentages are meaningless. For a surfer, being able to find 87 out of 100 Groaci Flute Craftsmen is better than, say, being able to find only 36% of all GFC's.

But for a site suggestor, the picture looks different. For a single site, there are no grades of "almost-listed" or "partly-listed" or "just-barely-listed." It's listed, or it's not. If 99 GFC's are listed and his client isn't, then he's still unhappy. It doesn't matter that GFC sites have a 99% chance of being listed.

[Apparently some people think past performance is a predictor of future returns. As I can't account for this delusion, I don't know how to respond to it.]