My site url submission still hasn't been accepted

The last submission of my site url was on Nov. 11, 2005, but as of today (Dec 23, 2006), my site still hasn't been accepted! Dunno why, but I guess the editors may be my competitors? Because before the submission made on 11/11/2005, I also tried several submission every 4 - 6 months.

Here's my site url: [url removed] (PR:4, has been online for almost 2 years with quality contents!)

ps: I found some similar websites that is newer but no better in terms of content quality have been accepted, which I think is hard to understand why my site is not accepted yet. I really doubt DMOZ now.


Thank you!

IVYtony

The reason a site is not listed yet is in most cases that it isn't reviewed yet.
For more explanation please read our FAQ.

You should be aware of some facts:

When we review a site, we don't ask whether there's another site better than it somewhere else. It would take us forever to answer that question! So we don't ask. We list it if it seems listable. So the fact is, every time we list a site, we do it KNOWING THAT THERE'S ANOTHER SITE SOMEWHERE THAT MIGHT BE BETTER BUT HASN'T EVEN BEEN LOOKED AT!

And we're OK with that. Because we can either do what we do now, or we can do nothing except try to answer impossible questions before we do anything at all. So we take the "do something good even if it's not the only good thing to do" approach.

The same logic applies to older sites. We don't review sites in order of age, and again that's because we have no easy, reliable way of finding the oldest sites -- and that would matter if there were some connection between age and listability. Which there isn't.

So we review and list sites EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW THERE ARE PROBABLY OLDER SITES SOMEWHERE THAT HAVEN'T BEEN REVIEWED.

And we're OK with that. Because we think it makes a WHOLE lot MORE sense for each editor to figure out the approach that's likely to find good sites most efficiently, than to set up arbitrary rules that have nothing to do with the value of the directory, and that nobody could follow if they wanted to anyway.

This is always assuming that a site best described as having "quality contents" is listable. My experience is that there's a high correlation but it runs the other way.