Pay for Review....

Hey guys, I know this has probably been asked before, but why don't you just charge to have a site reviewed for submission? Even if you said it would take 30 days to do it, it would be better than the 5+ years I've waited. That doesn't mean you accept the submission, but by not knowing why I site wasn't included, or if it was even reviewed, we have no way to move forward. If I knew my site was banned for some reason, I would just move on. But by having to come back OVER AND OVER to resubmit a site, without ever knowing the status, this is more like a Soviet agency than a 21st century operation in my humble opinion.

What is the rational behind the current process? I don't get it.

why don't you just charge to have a site reviewed for submission?

Click to expand...

Essentially because we're a group of volunteers building a directory for users, not a commercial organisation wanting to operate a listing service for website owners. The nature of using volunteers means we have to let them work on whatever categories they want to work on, with whatever time-scales they want to work to. We couldn't force them to review particular sites by particular deadlines. If we started charging for reviews, we'd loose the volunteers, and things would take even longer.

There are plenty of other pay-for-review or paid-listings directories out there if that's what you want as a site owner.

not knowing why I site wasn't included

Click to expand...

Our site selection criteria are publicly available. If a suggested site meets them, but hasn't been listed yet, then the overwhelmingly most likely explanation is that it hasn't been reviewed yet.

But by having to come back OVER AND OVER to resubmit a site

Click to expand...

If you had read the site suggestion instructions (the ones you have to agree that you've read and will abide by each time you suggest a site) you'd see that you should only suggest a site once. You'll also see the possibly consequences of ignoring that instruction...

See also my sig ;-)

Rob C said:

but by not knowing why I site wasn't included, or if it was even reviewed, we have no way to move forward.

Click to expand...

So you are saying that you only can move forward if you know what has happened with the suggestion you made to DMOZ.
I realy don´t get it but I have a solution.
Pretend the suggestion was rejected and move forward on that assumption.
Problem solved.

Honestly, I don't see the value in debating this, because it has never resulted in anything but frustration. The fact is, my site has a lot of great content, most of my competitors are listed, and I pay the price for being overlooked. No reason why. No way to correct the issue. DMOZ doesn't take money, and they don't have enough volunteers. So maybe in 20 years my site will get listed.

You don't need me to tell you this process is ridiculous. I am sure you've heard it 1,000 times before.

You don't need me to tell you this process is ridiculous

Click to expand...

The process is fine. What's ridiculous is folks believing that we're providing a website listing service (and then berating us for not volunteering hard enough) when that isn't our objective at all .

I don't get it.

Click to expand...

Well that's OK, but perhaps it might have been worth reading the publicly available guidelines before complaining that volunteers are not doing their "jobs".

I don't see the value in debating this, because it has never resulted in anything but frustration

Click to expand...

Quite true, because all we can do is to keep explaining the way the directory works. If that is unacceptable to some people, they will inevitably be frustrated. The only solution is to turn to a directory which does meet their criteria.