Can't get my sites listed AND can't contact editor - what should I do?

I tried to submit a couple of sites over a year ago, and once again a few months ago, but they don't get listed (I see many of my competitors listed though).

So I tried to contact the two editors of my category, but I keep getting the following message:

Proxy Error
The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
The proxy server could not handle the request POST /cgi-bin/send2.cgi.

Reason: Error reading from remote server

I feel helpless... anyone?

amirams said:

I tried to submit a couple of sites over a year ago, and once again a few months ago, but they don't get listed (I see many of my competitors listed though).

Click to expand...

What do you mean with "tried to submit". After you submitted a screen was shown that told you the "suggestion", as we like to call it, has been succesfull.
After you suggested a website an editor will look at it and decide if it will be listed. When that will happen is something we do not know. It might be within a few days, but it can also be only after several years.

So I tried to contact the two editors of my category, but I keep getting the following message:

Click to expand...

There is no need to contact editors, they are advised not to answer any emails from people asking about their website. BTW we should we give you any special preference, you are already getting the same as any other person who suggests a website.

Proxy Error
The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
The proxy server could not handle the request POST /cgi-bin/send2.cgi.

Reason: Error reading from remote server

Click to expand...

This is a known problem which has been reported many time in this forum (which you could have seen when you used the search)
And it is under investigation of AOL technical staff.

I am sorry, but I find your reply somewhat offensive.

We live in the 21st century, and I don't see a justification for any computer-related activity (especially a very simple one such as approving a site) to take "several years". Service providers (and DMOZ is a service, the fact that it's free is irrelevant) should provide prompt service and shold provide it always.

Even more offensive is your statement that editors "are advised not to answer" messages sent to them. When a human being contacts another human being, he or she is entitled to an answer, except perhaps when the contact is offensive or illegal (and "what happened to my submission" is neither).

And most offensive is your comment that "this is a known problem which has been reported many times". As I said, we live in the 21st century and computerized bugs should be corrected as soon as possible, not "reported many times" or be "under investigation".

It seems that my definition of DMOZ is not the same as yours. I consider DMOZ to be a very powerful commercial tool that promotes businesses by including them in the directory or demotes them by ignoring or redusing submissions. A powerful commercial tool such as this must provide prompt, equal and unbiased service to anyone asking to be served.

You may say that DMOZ is run bu volunteers. As I said, this is irrelevant. I'm sure that there are many inidviduals out there who are willing to provide prompt and unbiased service (I myself asked to become an editor quite a long time ago but got no reply).

It seems that my definition of DMOZ is not the same as yours.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

You might have misunderstood our objectives and how we operate here. ODP is a volunteer organisation building a directory as a hobby. Editors edit where they wish, when they wish and as much as they wish within the constraints of their permissions. We have no schedules or systems to force people to do work that they don't volunteer to do. ODP is not primarily a free listing service for website owners and it does not attempt to process their listing suggestions within the time scales desired by them.

Editors are advised not to reply to emails because the ensuing conversations all too often end badly. There have been examples of threats of bodily harm and actual stalking incidents. We are editors here and we didn't sign up for that sort of idiocy.

There's no need to email editors; suggested websites can speak for themselves when they are evaluated. Any general questions can be answered here and you can self check whether or not a website is listable.

we live in the 21st century and computerized bugs should be corrected as soon as possible, not "reported many times" or be "under investigation"

Click to expand...

Whilst I tend to agree with you, please address your comment to AOL who are the only people with the access and permissions to fix them. There's no point whatsoever berating editors about it.

<added> This forum is funded and run by volunteer editors. It's not owned by AOL</added>

amirams said:

I consider DMOZ to be a very powerful commercial tool that promotes businesses by including them in the directory or demotes them by ignoring or redusing submissions.

Click to expand...

Must be another DMOZ. The DMOZ I am an editor for is none of these.

pvgool said:

Must be another DMOZ. The DMOZ I am an editor for is none of these.

Click to expand...

Well, de-facto it is, even if it wasn't the original intention of the founders.

You could have restricted DMOZ to personal blogs only, and then again to those blogs that contain no links to any sites promoting commercial activity. But you didn't. Microsoft is included in DMOZ, many of my competitors are, and when I try to add my own site I get a reply saing "you may have to wait for years and you're not allowed to contact anyone" (and of course "you may eventually may not get included but we won't tell you why").

Would you say that Wikipedia editors should wait several years before inserting new articles to their site? Would you say that they should prefer some articles and refuse others without bothering to explain why? Would you say that they should not respond to comments forwarded to them? Would you say that they should keep bugs "under investigation" or blame others for bugs on their site? (If a simple bug in a forum cannot be corrected in a matter of hours, there are plenty other forum hosts and software packages that you can switch to).

I believe that even an organization run by volunteers sholdn't have double standards (as in "It might be within a few days, but it can also be only after several years") if this organization has a major commercial impact on its partcipants (and coming to think of it, even if it doesn't). You shouldn't hide behind "we are volunteers". You shouldn't hide behind "editors edit when they wish", especially when people like myself try to offer themselves as editors and get no reply (which proves that whoever reads the applications doesn't really care, not about DMOZ and not about simple human relationships). Either act according to the power that you have or cease to be.

Thank you for your comments. There's little point continuing this conversation because you clearly don't believe the replies you've already given and we volunteers have more productive work to do. Do not start another thread on a similar topic.

Oh, and there are millions of Wikipedia articles that haven't been written yet.