editors too strict?

Before I begin, I just want to say I'm not starting this thread to fight or quarrel with anyone. It's just a question.

It's been several months since I've submitted my site. Getting listed is very important for me as it is important to Google.

I don't want to sound arrogant, but my site is quite good. Plain design, informative content and I spend two to three hours a day to keep it updated. It doesn't violate any of your rules (nothing illegal, no redirections, not a mirror site...). I've also been listed in Yahoo!'s directory. Based on this, I don't see why I can't be listed here.

For my submission, I did my best to fill up the form. But as I said I've been waiting for months and still it hasn't showed up anywhere in the directory. So I've been going through your guidelines and rules over and over again to see where I went wrong.

We care a great deal about the quality of the ODP. We aren't a search engine and pride ourselves on being highly selective. We don't accept all sites, so please don't take it personally should your site not be accepted.

Click to expand...

This is the only possible explanation I was able to find why my site hasn't been listed. But I looked at other sites and frankly I don't see why I can't get listed with them Is it possible that there's a new editor taking the "quality" factor way too seriously?

Thanks!

In all probability your site has not even been looked at.

It is probably as simple as that.

In many categories sites can site for years before an editor looks at them.

FYI, we have a couple of FAQ items that indirectly address this.

Hope this helps.

spectregunner said:

In many categories sites can site for years before an editor looks at them.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the quick reply. So is there anything that can be done about it?

For the problem in general? Yes! You could volunteer to become an editor and help more sites get listed in the Project (whether submitted or sites you find yourself)

But do not do this if your sole objective is to get your own site listed. That usually ends in tears.

As far as getting your own site reviewed more quickly, no, there is nothing more you can do.

Not really. The pool of unreviewed sites is the ultimate proof of the randomization theory.

We'll look at them all eventually, but the waiting time is neither predictable nor manageable.

Think of it, 10,000 eidtors, editing as little or as much as they wish, in whatever part of the directory they wish (bound by permissions) and who are not required to even look at the unreviewed sites. It borders on chaos, but it works. Sites get added every day, many of which were not even submitted.

Combine that knowledge that most editors believe tha tthe pool of submissions in one of the poorest places to find good sites, and the human nature aspect that seems to draw many editors: the enjoyment of a good hunt. Count me among the editors would would rather spend 45 minutes lookng for a site to add to a small community in the backwoods, than to add yet another real estate agent to a major metropolitan area.

So, just keep doing what you are doing, keep improving your site for the visitors, adding content that only you can provide, and when an editor does either look at your suggetion, or find your site on their own, they will be thrilled with the discovery.

Thanks for your prompt responses again. You guys are doing a great job (for free) and I understand it must be very difficult to cope. I didn't understand this was the problem. Guess I'll have to remain patient and wait for my site to get reviewed.

@Alucard, I'll try and see if I can find some time to contribute. I'll be glad to help.

Coping isn't an issue.

We do this as a hobby, as volunteers. If it isn't fun, then we should be resigning immediately.

That doesn't mean that we don't take what we do seriously, of course, but by its very nature, editors will do whatever they are interested in. Many many editors get very frustrated having to search through some categories' unreviewed area to find the one or two listable sites in there - they would rather go out and find sites to list that haven't been submitted.

There again, there are other categories where submissions are the lifeblood of editors.

So it really is your choice as an editor - if you want to go and search for sites to list, then the directory is richer for that work. If you want to review unreviewed sites to find those to list, then the directory is also richer for your work.

It's a concept that a lot have struggled with (often becuase they see the ODP as a listing service, which it definitely isn't), but it works pretty well, I think.