Does dmoz work correctly?

The category does not have an editor because there's no qualified volunteer. And who knows why no qualified person has volunteered? Nobody, that's who.

Things that haven't happened don't ever have reasons. Only things that DO happen, can have reasons. So far, you haven't seen anything happen with those sites -- that's what ALWAYS happens when there's nobody to make it happen.

Your questions have already been answered but you apparently don't like the answers.

I give you details:
The following most popular JavaScript tools are not listed in this category

Click to expand...

He didn't ask you what sites aren't listed in the category. We already know that; you've mentioned them several times. He suggested that you use the Quality Control Feedback forum to tell us what sites are already listed there that you think don't meet our listing guidelines. We don't list sites on demand -- I'm sure someone will eventually choose to edit there, though your attitude here is not likely encouraging any editor reading this thread to make that category their next editing stop -- but we always want to know about sites that shouldn't be listed any longer.

If you have nothing to say here but what's been said already, then I would suggest that this thread has more than run its course.

I'm getting tired of your ranting. The situation from our side, is clear:

• That the "best" things that belong in the category are not listed, it is almost certainly due to a lack of interest.
• If there are sites listed in the category which do not belong there, we want to hear about it. We want to hear about it so much that we provide two "express" avenues for reporting it, the thread in the Quality Control forum, and "update suggestion" on DMOZ itself.

>because there's no qualified volunteer.

He he , the Day of a marmot.
Reread the topic.

>Things that haven't happened don't ever have reasons. Only things that DO happen, can have reasons. So far, you haven't seen anything happen with those sites -- that's what ALWAYS happens when there's nobody to make it happen.

You are a philosopher. Maybe you should to become an editor on the corresponding site?
I have understood than no one editor can give me a clear answer.
Why? Because the answers were given above and you can only add some philosophic (not valuable) touches.

>Your questions have already been answered but you apparently don't like the answers.

It seems that you do not like the questions.

>to tell us what sites are already listed there that you think don't meet our listing guidelines.

I am only wondering why rubbish sites are listed and good ones are not.
If you work well you would already removed the bad sites and added good.

> If you have nothing to say here but what's been said already, then I would suggest that this thread has more than run its course.

I am only user here and there are many editors.
Each one gives me many (sometimes silly) questions.
So I think that this thread will live for a long time (maybe forever?).

> I'm getting tired of your ranting.

Then quit this thread and find where users will flatter you. You will be pleased.

> If there are sites listed in the category which do not belong there, we want to hear about it.

Editor Hub - JavaScript - List of editors with JavaScript support with reviews. Sorted by platforms and licenses(broken link).
Do you want more?

So I think that this thread will live for a long time (maybe forever?).

Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think so.

Since we're just going around in circles here, this thread serves no further purpose. If you would like to report other broken URLs, please follow the instructions you've been given and use the " Report Hijacks, Dead Links, Inappropriate ODP Content, and other issues here ONLY" thread in the Quality Control Feedback forum. Beyond that, please do not start up any new threads or posts regarding this particular category.