Anyone who is doing site promotion "professionally" needs to understand the submitters' and editors' guidelines. The former say to submit a site to the most appropriate category, but that the actual listing is the editor's discretion. The latter say that multiple listings is "the exception" (although there are "standard" exceptions, none of which seem to apply here).
The editor chose a category which is more specific than the one you suggest (involving a particular kind of domain names.) It is obvious that at least some of the content on the site fits the category.
Passing by the question of the first letter of the company's name, and the legitimacy of the company, and several other irrelevancies that perhaps might better have not been raised, the relevant questions are: 1)Is there content on the site that doesn't fit the category it's in? (in which case the listing might need to be moved) 2) Is the site so exceptional that one listing cannot suffice to represent it adequately? (in which case additional listings might be appropriate)
Now, the editors' answer to both of these questions was "no". And of course it's impossible for them to list all the possible exceptions and or content types that might have changed either answer to "affirmative" -- and show that none applied.
In the absence of information that would suggest that decision was wrong (either that the site is wrongly placed, or is truly exceptional), there's nothing to debate, nothing to decide upon, and no reason to change.
This forum, of course, is not a place where such information can be given. But it could, I suppose, be used to point to aspects of the website that were overlooked in previous reviews.
So: the answer to your question is: the editor asked the two questions above, and gave negative answers. Other editors looked, and got the same answers. There could be many reasons for that -- the site navigation is very poorly designed and partly disfunctional: the editors
might not have been able to find that "exceptional" content, or they might have lost patience looking for it. (The link that _I_ thought had the best chance of being that content was broken. Well, we've listed worse, so you can't call this one "_exceptionally_ unprofessional".)
Well, I recognize that you probably won't like the answers, but if you can address the critical issues, some editor will may be willing to volunteer to look at the site again. No response guaranteed -- that is absolutely not part of the non-joblike thing called editing. And the lawyers require you to be informed (although perhaps the expectation of comprehension wouldn't stand up in court) that no site is guaranteed even one listing, before you submit any URL.
If you can work within those parameters, the ODP might be one avenue of at least informing the world about your site, although promotion of it will probably require other approaches.
