Reasons for being rejected

Hi,

maybe it sould be nice to add in this forum category where we can ask why some site is rejected. It is just an idea and I think that it would help to some of us. That way we would know why the site is rejected and therefore would not post it again the eidtors and maybe we would be able to do something to make our sites better for visitors. Also, that way it would be explicit if some editors are using their position for their business.

We tried it. Believe me, we would LOVE to be able to help people understand.

However, it got really nasty and got into huge debates - you still see some of it going on.

Not only that, but there is a small percentage of webmasters who are looking for ways to trick directories such as us into giving them multiple listings - they have all sorts of means to try to hide stuff, and we have all sorts of tools with which to find them out. By publishing how we know something (because we ARE asked), we risk giving these nefarious types a tool to help get better at tricking us.

So it was felt that it was better not to get into such matters on this forum. Instead, we refer people to other fora, aimed specifically at Webmasters, where such things can be discussed. Often it doesn't take an editor to work out why a site wasn't ODP guideline compoliant - just another set of eyes.

Another case of the few spoiling it for the many, I'm afraid.

It's not likely to happen on this forum. For a number of reasons, editors do not want to get into arguments about why sites are not listed.

Your best bet is checking out some of the forums here http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Chats_and_Forums/

Could I just add that not all webmaster forums welcome this type of question, so it might be as well to check the rules first.

If I may add, creatasite.com forums is extremely helpful with many questions you see frequently in dmoz forums. They are knowledgeable in multiple areas of the web, and if they cannot answer your question thoroughly, they will tell you who can. It was brought to my attention recently, and very much appreciated.

Take Bobrat's direction, and have a good long look. They are very dedicated individuals who, im sure, will comment all day long on why they think someone wasn't entered in odp.

antman.,
whilst I'm sure that whilst crea8asite appreciate the recommendation, it should be pointed out that they specifically state "But please don't ask us why your site was rejected" in their forum charter.
:tree:

Sorry. I had viewed a post on that topic that was commented upon.

Over 99% of the time, the reason is the same: Insufficient unique relevant content -- and that's generally not something you can "fix".

The problem wouldn't even arise if a lot of webmasters weren't wasting their time putting cosmetics on a corpse. "Would it be better if the rouge were a little higher on the cheekbones? ... Is the problem that there's too much lipstick and not enough eyeshadow?"

No, the problem is, the lights are off and nobody's home. And the fact is, webmasters ALWAYS KNOW this -- or if they don't, then we may be confident they'll never win the beauty contest. They KNOW whether there's any content on the site, and they KNOW where they got it. And they KNOW whether there are another dozen, or hundred, sites with exactly the same content, whether or not they own all of them.

No, for all of these sites, there's only one possible reason for asking us why they were rejected. They just want to know how WE figured out their content wasn't unique. We don't want to tell. If fellow-webmasters can point out the way in which the sites are ineligible, that's fine. But webmasters know. They just think we're too stupid to figure it out, or too crooked to follow the rules, or both. (And, frankly, I resent that more than a little bit.)

And the problem for many people seeing the debates here, is that they don't know the inside story of what's really happening about specific sites. A webmaster posts a frantic note here about us rejecting him, etc. etc., and it does often sound so sincere.

But sometimes webmasters have the misfortune to deal with an editor who knows more than expected. For example, they live across the street from the company, and know where it's really located, and that the address on the web site is a lie.

Or the webmaster who blantantly insisted to me that she only had one web site for her company, when in reality she had four different names for the same company and 3 fictitious locations, and had managed to get 7 listings in ODP.