Need Help? Site category maybe?

Greetings,

I have submitted my site, www.BoogieNetwork.com under Top: Society: Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual: News and Media (116)

Boogie Network is a LGBT portal and serves the LGBT community as a LGBT Media Company. I have submitted my site several times and never have been listed. Boogie Network has been up over a year and is #10 (first page) in Google for "lgbt media" all without a DMOZ listing, however, I really would like users to be able to locate my site in the DMOZ as I feel it is a valuable resource.

What am I doing wrong or should I apply for another category? I applied for an editor (I would be unbiased) for that category but was told the category was too large for a new editor. I read the guidelines and thought maybe (116) might be close enough to the recommended (100) for first time editors.

Thanks,
Terry
Boogie Network

A suggestion might be reviewed within a few minutes but it could also take several years. Nonone can predict when a suggestion will be reviewed. There is no need to suggest a site several times. If it is listable it will be listed someday.

The main thing you are doing wrong is making bad assumptions. You seem to suppose that your site suggestions are ways of impelling someone somewhere to do something immediately (and wondering why the spell isn't working). But reality is, site suggestions are ways of helping editors find sites to review.

You seem to think certain aspects of sites are important to editors: things such as target audience, search engine placement, webmaster estimate of value, webmaster desire for listing, ... I think that covers everything you mentioned -- but all those things matter not at all! That indicates how little overlap there sometimes is between the goals of submitted sites and the mission of the ODP.

In fact, there is so little overlap that the English language has diverged to the point that part of what you say makes no sense whatsoever in my language. How can a "website" "serve as" "a media company"? That just doesn't parse at all.

If there is a group of people working together to provide services for money (that is, a "company") then there's no reason why they shouldn't have a website to describe who they are and what they'll do for money. But the website is not the company, it's just an advertisement for it.

Sorry to ask...

Well, I did not assume anything, I just asked for help. I am sorry that I have upset you with my question. I will be sure not to ever ask for assistance or guidance again. I was only asking for help. Perhaps I misunderstood some previous readings.

People working together for a cause and have a website that describes those efforts and the company's mission AND serves as a portal to other related websites (not all owned by the company, however, inline with the companies mission) should not be listed? I can give numerous examples of sites that are indeed listed?

Is it so bad that a company desires to "make money?" How about this, I have lost money, not because I am trying to stike it rich, rather I am attempting to make a positive change in the world. Is it so bad to then try and make a small amount of this back in revenue? I never stated I was a non-profit website and I am not sure why this is even mentioned?

Again, I am sorry to have upset anyone. (Where is the crying icon?)

OK, the problematic assumptions here are:

(1) Anybody is upset. Nobody is. The forum is here to communicate information and dispel misinformation. An opportunity occurs, someone takes it.

(2) The site has been rejected, or will be. Nobody has said that: the new forum policy is not to give site submittal status (even by implication), so nothing said should be assumed to imply that.

(3) Anyone is going to ask about your motive in putting up the site. Presumably nearly all websites of companies are intended to attract profitable customers. In order to do this, they may include advertising or other material not inherently listable. So what? The question is, does the website give a unique authoritative answer to the root question, "who are you and what would you do for money?" And if we can manage to ignore the advertising and find that information (or, to put it another way, if the primary purpose of the site isn't advertising for some other entity), then the site is listable.

(4) It looks like you're still assuming that after some (X) number of days, if a site hasn't been reviewed, then the "compel an editor to drop everything else and do this now" spell hasn't worked. But there's no such spell, not in submittals, not in forum posts. (I could see which was the case, if I looked. But in cases where I look, I'm especially careful not to give that away, per the policy. And I find other editors are pretty careful also: the actual status of a submittal is not necessarily what you'd expect reading the posts -- we're responding to other aspects of the original post.

Pretend for a moment you're trying to help the ODP become a comprehensive directory, by finding relevant sites it has so far overlooked. (And also, perhaps, trying to promote a particular political position on the web -- there IS an overlap between those two motives, and many editors operate within it.) What would you do?

You'd suggest the sites of people or organizations that you know of (one per organization -- avoid "related site" penalties.)

Sooner or later (so the ODP theory goes) an editor, probably either sharing your political views or having some orthogonal interest in that kind of sites, will be working to make those categories more comprehensive, and your help may be exploited.

The theory works very well, so far as I can tell: but one limitation of it is that little "sooner or later" bit. There is absolutely no way to refine that time estimate. Not for us, not for anyone: the information simply doesn't exist and can't be collected.