Forgiveness...Is this possible

Not long ago, I submitted a url for consideration. Using tracking software, I learned later that an editor had visited my site and viewed the home page.

I've heard nothing since but am not certain that I should expect to hear anything, but am certain that if my site has been approved, it will get listed whenever.

I have two concerns. First, upon reading the descriptions of others in the same category, I my have described my business in a way that the editor may have considered too grandious. While I provided accurate information, it told the reader much more than they really needed to know and described the business in a very flattering manner. I read the rules and got the impression that resubmitting is prohibited. Is this true?

Second: If I assume that my url has been excluded for this, is Forgiveness possible through some administrative means which would allow me to more accurately submit without reprisal from an editor.

At the risk of sounding like a suck up, I'd like to take this opportunity to that the thousands of editors who volunteer their time to protect the integrity of the project. (Really..I mean that) And, if I messed up my only trip to the plate, please just tell me so, and the world will continue to spin.

Thanks in advance to all who take the time to respond.

Sites are not excluded due to what people write on the suggestion form. We have no idea WHO actually made the suggestion.

What is on the SITE is the only things that speaks for the site. So anything said in this forum also has no influence on any review.

Just because someone or something appears to have visited your site, that means nothing at all.

There are countless reasons that could account for that, and nothing at all can be construed from it.



What would you think if your saw that someone from your local newspaper had visited your site? You could think of many things, but you could not be certain of any...

Hi, don't worry about it - most descriptions are rewritten anyway. A good description tells the editor what to expect when they visit the site but most tell us about the business/organisation rather than the site itself. The vagaries of the contents of the title and description field are part of an editors life...

Note that just because an editor visits does not mean they have reviewed it, they may have just been checking which suggestions in the pool were spam, whether it was in the right category etc.

regards

Chances are, half of the other sites in that category were submitted with some kind of marketroid hype (the other half, of course, weren't suggested with a good description, because they weren't suggested at all -- they were found by editors.)

There's an attitudinal shift here, that needs saying twice daily. A SITE SUGGESTION is NOT an order for service, or an expression of a requirement, or anything else like that. It is NOTHING but information that someone thinks might help an editor.

There are three parts to that information. A URL. A site title. And a description. All are equally "suggestive". Each part is designed to help an editor find, categorize, and describe a website.

And so what happens if all the information is not equally helpful? The URL may be wrong by our standards--but it may be enough to help us find a better one. The description may be inappropriate for the ODP (OK, let's be honest here, the suggested descriptions are basically ALWAYS inappropriate for the ODP!) but it may still provide information to the editor about what aspects of the site were most important, and what content the editor should make sure and check. The title may be inappropriate for the ODP, but it still provides information.

So what if (when) part of the "information provided as help" isn't helpful? (In other words, what do we do all the time!) We throw away the part that isn't information, we throw away the information that isn't helpful, and make whatever use we can of the part that is. (And we do try to ensure we make whatever use CAN be made of it. We're information gluttons. We don't like throwing information away.)

All of which is to say, in all that YOU said, I can't see that you have anything to beg forgiveness for, because you did nothing that a thousand people don't do daily -- your attempt to help was not 100% efficient.

And let me stomp on an important point again. What gets a site listed (or not listed) is not suggesting it right, or not suggesting it wrong, or suggesting it wrong, or not suggesting it. All of those actions (or inactions) are only attempts to help the editor (or they are failures to help the editor). When it comes down to it, the listing ought to be based on what's on the site, and nothing else. And I think we do a fairly good job of living up to that ideal. (Our largest failure is in listing sites that shouldn't have been listed, just because they were suggested -- which is the opposite of the kind of error you contemplate.)

Finally, one resubmittal is permitted by the submittal policy. And you could would wipe out the prior suggestion and replace it with a new, hyposuctioned description, simply by resubmitting exactly the same URL to the same category. I think it would be taken as a small help -- and people who are trying to help (as opposed to trying to "make a living" or "promote their website" or "trying to impose priorities on the editors" or "trying to exercise editorial control ever the ODP") basically get a LOT of leeway over little violations of the policies before we start getting irritated, much less before we start slamming doors of communication in their face.

But I'm not sure I'd worry about doing that. So long as your original suggestion contained accurate information that'll help the editor quickly guess the right category for the site, then it's not a problem. (And rewriting descriptions is not a problem!)

Focus on making the website uniquely informative, and ... anything short of threats, bribes, or harassment will pretty much be ... not so much forgiven as ... un-noticed.

Not long ago, I submitted a url for consideration. Using tracking software, I learned later that an editor had visited my site and viewed the home page.

Click to expand...

Nothing should be infered from the appearance of a visit from dmoz in tracking logs. An editor may have visited briefly to see if the site was up and looked no further. They may indeed have examined it and rejected it. They may have examined it but just haven't listed it yet. It could also have been a visit from any number of automated tools that check submissions.

I've heard nothing since but am not certain that I should expect to hear anything, but am certain that if my site has been approved, it will get listed whenever.

Click to expand...

No notification is sent on review/acceptance/rejection.

I have two concerns. First, upon reading the descriptions of others in the same category, I my have described my business in a way that the editor may have considered too grandious. While I provided accurate information, it told the reader much more than they really needed to know and described the business in a very flattering manner. I read the rules and got the impression that resubmitting is prohibited. Is this true?

Click to expand...

Editors are used to glowing descriptions and , if the site is listable, will edit the description appropriately to the guidelines. No need to resubmit for this.

Second: If I assume that my url has been excluded for this, is Forgiveness possible through some administrative means which would allow me to more accurately submit without reprisal from an editor.

Click to expand...

Descriptions that don't need to be rewritten are a rarity so a description alone would not make a site unlistable. Don't assume that becasue you hear nothing it has been rejected. It is far more likely it simply hasn't been fully reviewed as yet.

At the risk of sounding like a suck up, I'd like to take this opportunity to that the thousands of editors who volunteer their time to protect the integrity of the project. (Really..I mean that) And, if I messed up my only trip to the plate, please just tell me so, and the world will continue to spin.

Click to expand...

Thanks, it's always nice t be appreciated. Very few sites get "one trip to the plate" so I wouldn't be unduly concerned.

Recent technical problems have also delayed things more than usual so please, if you haven't, have a look at the annoucemnt at the top of the forums.