my website is in right categories,why not get listed

A few months ago, I read that forum's guidelines and submit my website ,But .
My site <url removed> is not being accepted by Dmoz after repeated submissions in right categories.

I don`t know why?who can help me get listed in the dmoz.Thanks.

Your suggestion will be appreciated.Thanks.

Best Regards

David

> A few months ago, I read that forum's guidelines
Please read our FAQ again. Especialy How long until my site will be reviewed?

> after repeated submissions in right categories.
Please read the DMOZ guidelines again.
.... Identify the single best category for your site.
.... Suggest your site only once

> who can help me get listed in the dmoz.
Sorry, nobody can.

> Your suggestion will be appreciated.
Have patience

About dmoz

My webiste is listed at dir.yahoo.com/

why not liste my websited at dmoz.org?I doubt that the editor are not good at this work very well.

Who can give me a reply.Thanks.

I merged your new thread with your previous one, because the answers are still the same.

Yahoo maintains a commercial directory--and they're very good at it--better than anyone else.

They sell a service (website reviews and feedback)--and they have an excellent reputation, because they do a good job. And with the money that brings in, they hire editors to find and review noncommercial sites. Since they're a for-profit organization, this part of their work is, um, comparatively underfunded (compared to, say, the Open Directory).

The Open Directory maintains an amateur directory--and I think we also do it better than anyone else. We look for editors who review sites "for the love of it" (that's what amateur means!) And it works. In fact, with some of the editors' excess energy, many commercial sites get reviewed and listed--although not so many as are listed in Yahoo.

There's more than one way to organize the web, and that's good: because no one way is perfect. For users, the Open Directory and Yahoo are two different valuable options. Different. And valuable because they are different.

Happy New Year ,I am from China

Happy New Year ,I am from China

Basically it the luck of the draw?

be reading the forum and following the guidlines...its basically the luck of the draw when and if a site gets listed...correct.

Baysfdental said:

be reading the forum and following the guidlines...its basically the luck of the draw when and if a site gets listed...correct.

Click to expand...

yah sure as per guidlines say's

No, it's not "luck of the draw" as to IF a website will be listed. There are guidelines, and most sites fall clearly on one side or the other.

It IS "luck of the draw" as to WHEN a website will be REVIEWED. And it couldn't be any other way. How could anyone automatically sort all the sites on the web "most relevant" to "least relevant" for a particular topic? Google tries, but a review of the top 30 listings in any category will show both how well they do find SOME good stuff, and how badly they would be as a mandatory guide toward what's better and what's worse.

Some people are always looking for a way to guarantee that their website will be reviewed first, or in some particular timeframe. If that ever happens, the Open Directory will be dead. Because the professional spammers will immediately guarantee that no good website will ever be reviewed again, until all the world's spam is reviewed -- and THAT won't ever happen.

So we all have to live with reality: the tradeoff for not being able to guarantee your site gets reviewed within x milliseconds is the knowledge that editors can try different ways of finding good sites to review, and can use what seems to work best.

And that's a tradeoff well worth making.

hutcheson said:

No, it's not "luck of the draw" as to IF a website will be listed. There are guidelines, and most sites fall clearly on one side or the other.

It IS "luck of the draw" as to WHEN a website will be REVIEWED. And it couldn't be any other way. How could anyone automatically sort all the sites on the web "most relevant" to "least relevant" for a particular topic? Google tries, but a review of the top 30 listings in any category will show both how well they do find SOME good stuff, and how badly they would be as a mandatory guide toward what's better and what's worse.

Some people are always looking for a way to guarantee that their website will be reviewed first, or in some particular time frame. If that ever happens, the Open Directory will be dead. Because the professional spammers will immediately guarantee that no good website will ever be reviewed again, until all the world's spam is reviewed -- and THAT won't ever happen.

So we all have to live with reality: the tradeoff for not being able to guarantee your site gets reviewed within x milliseconds is the knowledge that editors can try different ways of finding good sites to review, and can use what seems to work best.

And that's a tradeoff well worth making.

Click to expand...

Suppose you are referring there to same guidelines which Jim refer on other thread too correct ? SAME guidelines which I pointed today on the morning 3 links where they have completely broken this rules ( i`ll not write the URLs on the forums like I`ve done with the other two URLs which I reported yesterday - thanks for offer if this you had in mind to ask ) . I know, I know, its a volunteer work to be editor and the editors are free to spend their time on ODP when they wish and how they wish , they just have also to follow rules from the guidelines ... funny how this statement it's still keep said I`m curious how much peoples browsing day by day ODP , what chances are to find at least one of the 3 links which I said on other thread - with sure this ones follow the guidelines and waited patiently for a kindly and honest review from one of editors

its a volunteer work to be editor and the editors are free to spend their time on ODP when they wish and how they wish , they just have also to follow rules from the guidelines

Click to expand...

Yep, you got it!

makrhod said:

Yep, you got it!

Click to expand...

nasty rules , what can I say ... for more references about the links will not be nice to go too far away from the subject of the thread started there .

Nobody's going to go looking through the directory looking for three links which (you say) are there. Trust me on this: why would they? Why would they, um, trust you?

If you ever want to help, you know how you can. There's a thread where you can report any problems of that sort you find.

Now, I'll propose a different test. Go learn the guidelines: read them every day, if you need to. Now pick a topic that an inexperienced surfer could handle -- say, all the schools in a particular city or county, websites about pigmy mastodons as pets, websites about Dostoyevsky ... (no e-commerce or affiliate-targeted topics, that would be too difficult for anyone without experience to weed out the spam).

Now do some Google searches--go 100-300 deep, and see how many websites devoted to that topic that you can find. And see how many of them are listed in the ODP. And with Yahoo. (_I've_ never had to spend an hour to find several bad Yahoo links!)

Or just compare the sites that are in ODP but not in Yahoo, with the converse.

Do that a dozen or two times, and ... well, it'll be like Columbus, you'll see a whole new world. You'll see both the possibilities and the limitations of what humans can do. You might even learn to trust (selectively) and be trusted.

TrustNobody said:

Suppose you are referring there to same guidelines which Jim refer on other thread too correct ? SAME guidelines which I pointed today on the morning 3 links where they have completely broken this rules ( i`ll not write the URLs on the forums like I`ve done with the other two URLs which I reported yesterday - thanks for offer if this you had in mind to ask ) . I know, I know, its a volunteer work to be editor and the editors are free to spend their time on ODP when they wish and how they wish , they just have also to follow rules from the guidelines ... funny how this statement it's still keep said I`m curious how much peoples browsing day by day ODP , what chances are to find at least one of the 3 links which I said on other thread - with sure this ones follow the guidelines and waited patiently for a kindly and honest review from one of editors

Click to expand...

The fact that there are websites listed that have some problems at this moment has nothing to do with following the guidelines by editors.
As has been pointed to you either
- the website changed (this happens a lot)
- the guidelines changed (this has happened several times over the years)
- a mistake was made (this also happens, we are humans and humans do make mistakes)
You have also been told that it is impossible for us to check all listed websites for such changes. We are able to notice many changes but there will always be websites that we did not notice. That is why we appreciate all the help we get from the public when they find suc a website. Just report them and actions will be taken.

The fact that such websites are listed will have totaly no effect on any website that is suggested to us.
The fact that someone let us know about such a website will have totaly no effect on any website that is suggested.
Complaining again and again about such listings will have totaly no efffect on any website that is suggested.
Complaining again and again in several threads when you have been explained what could have caused these websites to be listed could be seen as annoying and will put you in a bad light

The problem isn't with the rules. The rules are good enough. (The best proof of that is, of course, the character of the people who don't like them.)

@ hutcheson honestly I filled the editorial volunteer just to check it nothing more and nothing less , even if I filled it with responsibility I didn't even thought 1 second someone will read it or even approve it. Even if I'm wish to have the time and energy to do some of this jobs I think will be better to do other things . The 3 links which I said on other topic are there like the other 2 dead links was there and was deleted by one of your colleagues .
Yes the problem is not the rules like they are , they are good . Just will be nice to be followed by everyone if they are rules and must be follow don't you think ?

@ pvgool The 3 links which I refer there wasn't changed on their existence , I checked the web.archive dot org + the whois records for the domains + the cache of the google where where I found nasty things . I pointed them just like a reply for so loved by everyone rules and guidelines which its seems to be followed always by all of us . Explanations which was said about why this 3 particular links are absolute ridiculously and are far away from the spirit of ODP community at least how much I saw and I`m trying to understand it based on fair truth and responsibility . Putting me on bad light just because I`m saying something which is true ? or just because I`m repeat it over few times . Don't worry I think is last time when I`ll make any reference about this 3 links there and that's all , if you or anyone else wanted that its enough just to drop a note saying short and sweet '' shut up '' and everything can be fixed . Even if editors can delete and approve the links from ODP they cant delete the web.archive.org records ( only if they have access to edit the robot.txt file ) and they cant delete the records of the domains by any chance . So . Thanks for reading it . And I hope to understand what I wanted to say with all those posts from today .

OK, I think we've gone over and over this enough times. You've brought up your concerns about the bad listings and they've been dealt with. Thank you for that. I'm now going to close both of your threads. If you find any other sites that shouldn't be listed, feel free to report them in the appropriate thread (I know you know where that is). But please DO NOT start up another thread or post in an existing thread on this topic.