meeting-place.net (was Submission status please)

B

brmehlman

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
3,080
Re: Submission status please . . .

It's awaiting review in that category, along with several dozen othes. The date of submission was July 27, if there were any earlier ones that one must have overwritten them.
 
W

webster

Re: Submission status please . . .

Thank you,
I have been submitting the site every month or so for the past year because your submission instructions say that if the listing is not done in three weeks it should be re-submitted. You should let people know that doing so nullifies the previous submission.
Anyway, thanks for the update.
 
B

brmehlman

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
3,080
Re: Submission status please . . .

Oh, dear, that does sound like something we should fix. Could you tell me where it says to resubmit in three weeks if it hasn't been listed? If so, I'll do what I can to get it changed.
 
W

webster

Re: Submission status please . . .

http://dmoz.org/add.html

Procedure After Your Site is Submitted
" . . . . . If a site you submitted has not been listed after three weeks, you may submit it again or you may send an e-mail to an editor of the category for which the site was submitted."
 
M

motsa

Curlie Admin
Joined
Sep 18, 2002
Messages
13,294
Re: Submission status please . . .

It means resubmit it once after three weeks, not every three weeks.
 
W

webster

Re: Submission status please . . .

Then it ought to say that.
 
H

hutcheson

Curlie Meta
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
19,136
Re: Submission status please . . .

"EVERY three weeks?"

Sorry, but you can't get it to say that without rearranging the letters.

It says you may resubmit after three weeks. After you've done that, it mentions no more options. It doesn't ANYWHERE say "you may resubmit again in ANOTHER three weeks."
It's mostly not a big problem for us. Lots of people don't read the submittal guidelines at all, and we still look at their submittals. People who have read this forum, or any of the other "directory" forums out there, will have seen the "overwrite" behavior mentioned a number of times. People who stop and think about what is happening underneath will understand that there's no point in submitting over and over--it just wastes the editors' time and annoys them. One resubmittal, to take care of the <1% of submittals accidentally lost, makes sense. For people who neither read nor think, we have automatic duplicate-submittal pruning.
 
G

giz

Member
Joined
May 26, 2002
Messages
3,112
Re: Submission status please . . .

A minor change of wording might be in order, to add the word once somewhere in there. People see what they want to see. In cases where it doesn't expressly say something, people might assume that it allows the opposite of what isn't said.
 
X

xixtas01

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
624
Re: Submission status please . . .

Thanks for pointing out that paragraph as having been confusing to you. I have put it on my list of documentation issues to discuss with other editors. {moz}
 
W

webster

Re: Submission status please . . .

If re-submitting the site after three weeks only overwrites the original submission anyway, then why tell people to do it at all ? It's not that the paragraph is confusing, it is just plain wrong. I am well aware that most directories do this, but your instructions give the impression that if the listing is not done in three weeks it is not going to get done so there would be no harm in resubmitting. You obviously don't want people doing it, so just take it out of the instructions.
 
H

hutcheson

Curlie Meta
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
19,136
Re: Submission status please . . .

Sorry, we still think that "one resubmittal, to take care of the <1% of submittals accidentally lost, makes sense."
 
W

webster

Re: Submission status please . . .

I understand the point you are trying to make. Since you are obviously aware of what the instruction was supposed to mean, I guess you just can't accept the fact that that's not what it says. You're acting like I did something wrong because I read the instructions, and followed them. Luckily, most people don't bother, I guess.
 
W

webster

Re: Submission status please . . .

Anyhow, aside from the badly worded instructions I appreciate all the help everyone has offered here. I promise not to submit the site anymore ! :mad:
I'll just check back again in a month or so.
 
H

hutcheson

Curlie Meta
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
19,136
Re: Submission status please . . .

Perhaps in the future yhat wording could be made more explicitly clear. There have been internal discussions on the wording of that section; right now, staff has higher priorities -- like getting our forums stable again so we can have internal discussions -- but I too would be happy to see the wording improved.
 
S

Sunanda

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2003
Messages
248
Re: Submission status please . . .

If re-submitting the site after three weeks only overwrites the original submission anyway, then why tell people to do it at all ?

The wording is confusing, and I hope now you've alerted the authorities here (who are usually hair-trigger on grammar issues) it will be changed.

The original intention, as I understand it, was to give you a second chance should if, for whatever reason, the orginal submission go ate by a bug in DMOZ. I don't know if the new software is now stable enough that such a second chance is is longer needed.

there would be no harm in resubmitting
There is no harm in resubmitting to the same category. All the editor will see is the latest submission.
 

Re: Submission status please . . .

The "feature" of overwriting old submissions is fairly new. I think the instructions are older than that, but I agree that there is no mention of submitting EVERY three weeks.
 
W

webster

Re: meeting-place.net

I am aware that this site is still waiting in unreviewed, but maybe if I keep asking about it someone will go in there and help get this category caught up. As you can see by my previous posts, much of the delay was caused by my own stupidity, so I really can't complain about that, but now the submission has been sitting there for two more months without being looked at.
Thanks again
 
spectregunner

spectregunner

Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2003
Messages
8,768
Re: meeting-place.net

but maybe if I keep asking about it someone will go in there and help get this category caught up.
Click to expand...

If you really believe that, then you are successfully wasting all of our time.

There is absolutely no relationship between a request being posted in this fora and any editor processing a site. The first time that happened there would be chaos and we would have lose control of this discussion medium.

Yes, editors respond very quicky to questions or reports of abuse, particularly domain hijacks, but no one gets their site reviewed one iota faster because they posted here.

And, just like in real life, having someone "nipping at your heels trying to get your attention" does not motivate one to want to help.

the submission has been sitting there for two more months
Click to expand...

Maybe I should leave the category where I am currently working at reviewing several hundred sites that were submitted as far back as June 1991 and go to a category where someone is waiting two months?

Or perhaps I should ignore my commitment to work next on a category that has not had a good quality control check in more than 18 months, dashover and work in the category where you have waited two whole months, just to avoid having you poke us with a sharp stick.

I would like to gently suggest that you rethink your strategy.
 
W

webster

Re: meeting-place.net

Maybe I should leave the category where I am currently working at reviewing several hundred sites that were submitted as far back as June 1991 and go to a category where someone is waiting two months?
Click to expand...

I would like to gently suggest that the situation you describe above is no one's fault but your own. If all I can do is keep asking if the site has been reviewed, then I'm going to keep asking.
 
This site has been archived and is no longer accepting new content.
Top