Request status-first submitted on 7/19/2002 ( http://www.supplementsolutions.com/ )

Sincerely Request status on my site that was first submitted on 7/19/2002.
Supplementsolutions.com
Shopping: Health: Nutrition: Dietary Supplements

From first submittal to 1-2004, I sent two emails and never received any answer.

In January 2004, I was told by someone whom I thought was an "expert" , that if I submitted individual product pages, I would get listed easier. So...., I stupidly submitted five product pages on 1/21/2004 as follows:

1. shopping: Health: Nutrition: Dietary Supplements: Specialty Products: Sam-e
Supplementsolutions.com/same.htm
2. shopping: Health: weight Loss: supplements
Supplementsolutions.com/carbeliminator.htm
3. shopping: health: reproduction and sexuality: breast enhancement: supplements
Supplementsolutions.com/breastenhancement.htm
4. shopping: health: beauty: cosmetics: lip care
supplementsolutions.com/lips.htm
5. shopping: health: nutrition: dietary supplements: specialty products: joint health
supplementsolutions.com/joints.htm

I confess that I am scared to death to write this email. I have heard a lot about how difficult it is to get into your directory and I think that I have done everything incorrectly. I did read the rules and regulations very carefully for submittal, but to be honest, back in 2002, when I first started, I barey knew what a "directory" was. I would appreciate it so very much if someone could tell me what I need to do now. I have been reading your forum for hours, days even and now realize I should not have submitted over and over. I was not trying to "spam" as I would not know how to do that even if I tried. I am just a retired grandmother trying to supplement my income and I do not have any real education on any of these issues other than what I pick up on the forums. It would be just so nice to hear from someone - anybody. I could sure use some help.

In August 2002, during a cleanup of duplicate submissions, it was deleted from Shopping/Health/Nutrition/Dietary_Supplements

In September 2002 the same thing happened in Shopping/Health/Nutrition

This January, a copy was retained for review in Shopping/Health/Beauty/Cosmetics/Lip_Care but the URL was shortened from http://www.supplementsolutions.com/lips.htm to http://www.supplementsolutions.com/


So, without going on a big snipe hunt, here is where you likely stand: There is at least one copy (possibly more) awaiting review in Shopping/Health/Beauty/Cosmetics/Lip_Care but it will probably be moved up a level by the reviewing editor.

The fact that you have not heard from anyone is not unusual, we don't send out any notices of any type, so there ws really nothing to hear.

You should probably bookmark this thread, and you can come back in six months for another status check. Please do not resubmit unless told to do so by an editor in this forum.

If you find the person who told you to submit individual product pages you have our express permission to...................

Thank you, Thank you , Thank you !!- spectregunner - I will go to bed tonight with hope

Requesting update

http://www.supplementsolutions.com/

Hey guys - just wanting an update. Before you reply, let me go ahead and beat you to the punch:

Yes, I know I was suppose to wait 6 months
Yes, I know you are volunteers
Yes, I know you pretty much do not care about owners of websites trying to sell something/commercial sites
Yes, I know that you like finding your own new sites and many times ignore submittals
Yes, I know that you are busy
Yes, I have very good content
Yes, I have read the guidelines
No, I am not a spammer
Yes, I know that I am at your mercy and there is absolutely nothing that I can do
Yes, I did offer to be an editor to help out and was refused
Yes, I know after reading your forum for many months, that there are some really nice editors that truly do want to help
Yes, I know I have made mistakes in my submittals
Yes, I know that your different editors interpret your guidelines differently and that bottom line, you make no guarantees or commitals of any kind
Yes, I know you do not answer emails
Yes, I know you do not provide time-lines
Yes, I know that many of the DMOZ editors/administrators like to treat a DMOZ submitter with humor and wonder why it is so important to some of us out here to get listed in your directory

With that said, I just want you to know that I am a truly sincere owner of a small internet business out here just trying to earn some extra cash. I am not any of the things that you accuse so many of your DMOZ submitters. I am not tricking anybody or doing anything that I know of to abuse your policies and guidelines. I use many of the products on my site that I sell and truly believe in them. I have been submitting to your directoy for almost 2 years. I feel I have a very good website and have been increasing sales slowly but surely. You should know that there are some honest commercial sites out here even though you have not accepted my site nor found me on your own. I am one of them.

OK, I won't give you an update -- the six month rule applies to honest sites as well as the others (granted, we don't run into it with them nearly as often.)

But there is some advice. (This is presuming you have already committed mayhem on the spammer who gave you bad advice, or at least hired it done. But that's between you and your obligation to society at large.)

The ODP isn't a reliable website promotion method. That's an inevitable result of its design, structure, and management: all of which are focused on the most efficient way of getting SOME thousand sites listed every day, to the total exclusion of having any control over WHICH thousand they are.

This isn't (from that perspective) a problem to be fixed, not that it could be fixed anyway. And the forums here aren't an attempt to fix that -- in fact, we stay completely out of that business here also. (The guidelines state that it must not be used for requesting a review.)

In short, what you need -- guaranteed promotion and visibility for your business site within some specified finite time -- the ODP can't promise. So you need to find someone who can. Yahoo, Looksmart, Overture, all the various commercial links, off-the-web promotions -- because the ODP is not going to be there for you -- or any other specific site (except by accident).

When the six months are up, come back -- if you want. There will be plenty for you to be doing elsewhere, and the ODP will grind its way in its own time: some day when you've completely forgotten about it, and don't need it anymore, some editor may say, "the ODP cannot any longer claim to be comprehensive without this site" and list it. But we can't say when that will be, and there's nothing further you can do to make it happen sooner.

Just don't understand why you make it so difficult???

Well, Mr. Hutcheson - I appreciate your prompt reply. I see your thoughts everywhere. You wait for everyone to have their say and then you go in for the final word in a type of summation . I like your style. I have waited several days answering because after reading the forum for many months, I sincerely don't believe you guys really want any new thoughts. I think you have the rules down pat and you just don't want to hear anything else. However, I just can't go away until I ask you a simple question. Mr. Hutcheson, - you always reply with courteous and detailed replies but I always wonder why you just don't look at the submitters site, make a decision, let the submitter know your answer and move on. Instead of spending so much time explaining what you do not do, why don't you just do it. I am asking this question for all of the hundreds of submitters out there and directed to all of the hundreds of editors/administrators. Now, I know you are going to come back with all kinds of explainations (again, ) as to why this cannot be done. I am just pointing out that sometimes, it really is that easy. Eveyone makes it so hard. I mean who decided that a non-submitters site was more important than a submitters. Does a submitter even get the smallest bit of credit for taking the time to submit? Does the submitter ever get the tiniest bit of respect? I am a submitter. When I first started my business, I had several goals - just one of them being DMOZ. I already have accomplished "guaranteed promotion" and "visibility" with many other sources. But you just keep insisting that DMOZ should not be important to a submitter. I do not expect DMOZ to guarantee me "website promotion" but I do believe that being in your directory will help me and I am trying to cover all of my bases, DMOZ being one of them. Surely, you cannot fault a sincere submitter for trying to optimize their sales as much as they can. But, bottom line, if you and your fellow editors have one goal in mind - building the best darn directory you can - then why do you try so hard and take so much time to make us submitters go away? Yes, I have plenty to do (in answer to your previous advice) in continuing the on-going optimization of my site. But forget about DMOZ - no, that just won't happen. And it shouldn't - I am a bussinesswoman afterall and it would be irresponsible of me to just abandon one of my goals. I mean what is life without hope? I will be back just so I can pester you guys.

To put things in perspective - here is a reality about submissions. In the last day or so for the last several submissions I have looked at:

6 were published, two would have been published sooner if they had been submitted to the right category.
9 were submitted to the wrong category and moved to be reviewed by someone else
1 was refused as having no content
1 was refused from a known spammer
1 was deleted as having no content [and this is the third time I've deleted it since he has submiited to three other categories before]
1 redirected to a spam site and refused
5 were deleted as the site was not found
1 was deleted for failing to meet the category guidelines
5 were deleted as not being in English and already listed in ODP in the right place.

During that same period I found 6 new sites that were not submitted and good for my categories, another was good for a category I do not edit and was sent there.

So that means most of the work I did with the submissions was fixup bad submissions. Instead if doing that, maybe I could have spent the time searching for new sites and ended up adding more to the directory.

I have around 2000 submissions in front of me that I could choose to review, but with the amount of spam, and bad descriptions I have to wade through, sometimes it's just more rewarding to search for sites myself.

I always wonder why you just don't look at the submitters site, make a decision, let the submitter know your answer and move on.

Click to expand...

I certainly don't want (or dare... ) to speak for someone who speaks so eloquently for himself, but I will tell you why I won't do as you suggest: Because it would not be fair, and because it would slow everything down.

You suggest that people who inquire about the status of their submissions should be rewarded with an instant review; as a result, people who don't know about the existence of this forum (and those who think that good sites will be listed in the end, "even" without their asking) would have to wait longer. Now, surely that is not fair.

Of course, if we were to implement your suggestion (which we will not), every spa..., eh, webmaster on the face of the earth would start to make inquiries at least three times a day (and if their sites are rejected, they will appeal, etc.), so that would slow things down.

There is one thing submitters can do to speed up the ODP process as a whole (not necessarily the review of their site): follow the fairly simple instructions.

If you read bobrat's post, you'll see that many sites are submitted to the wrong category, with a title and/or a description that does not follow the guidelines. This simply causes extra work for the editors; the submitters will, of course, complain that "things take far too long".

The forum guidelines tell you that you should wait for six months, yet you think that rule does not (or should not) apply to you.

At least three editors have now spent time addressing your concerns --time that could have better been spent editing.

Of course, if we hadn't answered your question, that would have been yet another reason for complaint, wouldn't it?!

And to add

I will sometimes contact submitters, but it has to be a very good reason. I have a site in an English category - it was placed there some time ago. While doing some quality control checks, I found that while the site is supposed to be in three languages, for some reason, the English and one of the other languages no longer works.

Now that means I have to delete the site from that categroy, and leave it only in the World category for the single language that still works. But that is the only site in the category, and that would be a pity to have no site left there. So in this case - it's worth contacting the site owner, and ask him how to fix the problem.

O dear... I had not looked at your site before; I accidentally just did.

Have you read Submitting a Site to The Open Directory Project (in particular Step One, "Determine whether a site is appropriate for submission to the ODP")? If so, do you honestly think that your site is listable? --Just curious.

marcelfeenstra - that was an unnecessary mean reply. Yes, I do honestly think my site is applicable to DMOZ. If "applicable" means helping people out there in the world and giving them information about their health and providing products for them to purchace if they should choose to do so - then YES, my site is "applicable". Myself, my family, and many,many friends have benefited greatly from some of my products - so Yes, again, my site is "applicable". My 90 year old mother just visited with me and she swears by three of my products. Almost 50% of my orders are repeat orders so again, Yes, my site is helping a lot of people out there and therefore is applicable. If my site does not meet someone's idea of "applicable" based on the technical characteristics of the site, then be specific and tell me what is wrong because I truly do not know. I just now reread Step One of your Guidelines as you suggested:
1.) My site is not a mirror site. I am the owner of it. No one else. There are other sites that sell the same products but they are not owned by me. and that is the truth
2.) I have no other sites listed in your directory
3.) I did not disguise my submission. I did submit more url's as I explained in an earlier email and did admit my stupidity-I am an owner, not a webmaster so it took me awhile to understand - I admit that
4.) My site does not redirect to another address (although I am not sure exactly what this means)
5.) I have no illegal content
6.) My site is not under construction
7.) My site is not Pornographic
8.) My site is not "non-English"

I am "curious" to hear where I am going wrong.

What I generally do, when there is a question about a site in a category, is (1) do not review the site for a listing. That wouldn't be fair to others, (2) try very hard to avoid doing anything that might have the appearance of retaliation, even if it's a justified editing action [note: this implies basically the only thing I end up doing is moving the site to a better category or adding a note for future reference] But I do (3) take the question as a hint that the category might have been neglected, and spend some time cleaning the unreviewed queue -- often half an hour to several hours.

Without having looked at your site, you may have provided the answer in your last posting:

There are other sites that sell the same products

Click to expand...

In a general sense, we make no effort to list every site that sells a given product. We do make an effort to find sites that are selling unique products, and if we cannot easily identify the unique content, we assume the surfer cannot, and we do not list the site, because once we have listed one or two sites selling the same microprocessor-powered nose hair clipper, we are not doing our surfers a service by listing 19 others.

If "applicable" means

Click to expand...

'When I use a word,' the ODP editor said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what the guidelines say it should mean, neither more nor less.'

I did not ask if the site is useful, or helpful, or meaningful, or full of products --simply if the site meets the ODP criteria for listing.

A site can pass every test but the last one; and will still not be listed. The key criterion considered by ODP editors is: Is there "sufficient unique content"?

I did not intend my reply to be "mean" --I was just a little angry at myself for spending too much time on a question regarding a site that, in my opinion, had a limited chance of being listed at best. (Disclaimer: I am not an editor in that particular category; I do, however, hope to have some limited understanding of the ODP guidelines.)

Spectregunner, bobrat and Hutcheson - thank you.

Marcelfeenstra,
1.) If you have read my previous emails, you will see that I did not ask for a 2nd update - I have spent 2 years waiting in a nonverbal patient manner hoping my number will come up and finally decided to make my thoughts known. In my first point, I stated that I was fully aware of the 6 month waiting period. I was simply airing my thoughts on the same thread which I guess was wrong- again. (As you would say, if I had started a new thread, that would probably have been wrong also) We out here in the non-ODP world do not know all of the ins and outs of your rules. This part will sound a little sarcastic but I just can't think of a better way to say it. If ODP editors truly cared about being "fair", then they would handle "submissions" in the order that they came in. It pretty much seems ridiculous that you can't get in line somewhere. You go into a post office and you get a number-it keeps the herds from killing each other. OK, I forgot that editors do not like submitters. End of sarcasim - promise!
2.) I know that you didnot ask for anything other than that the criteria be met. Since I already believed I had answered the eight points in Step one and did meet the criteria, I thought I might indicate to you the usefulness of my site. In the ODP guidelines, it speaks of submitting a site that is "as useful as possible for our users" and "making the ODP a useful resource" thus the reason why I felt you should know that my site was a "useful" site even though you feel "it has a limited chance of being listed at best".
3.) "meeting the ODP criteria for listing" and "sufficient unique content" - awh, there is the rub isn't it - Again, in a previous email, I listed my belief that I fully met the eight criteria listed in your Step One. However, Marcelfeenstra, your answer was not specific enough. Luckily Spectregunner gave me enough details that I understood what he meant. So...., where in the guidelines does it say that you will not list sites selling products that other sites sell. If this is a rule, then I have missed it and do apologize and will go away knowing that my site can never meet that particular criteria. If, Marcelfeenstra, you are referring to bullet point 2 under Step one, which says "do not submit URL"S that contain only the same or similar content as other sites you may have listed in the directory", then again - as stated earlier, I have not submitted nor own any other sites listed in your directory. If you interpret this point to be "similar content on sites that are owned by other people", then again, I know I can not meet your number 2. What does bullet point 2 mean??
4.) You are a busy guy. Thanks for letting me know that. I have had nothing to do but check ODP every day for the last two years to see if I am in your directory and also get to keep doing it for many more years. I also get to write emails to you guys and try to forget the fact that I was deleted twice during cleanups.

Getting into your directory has now become one of my "lifetime" goals. I changed it from a "2002", then "2003", then "2004" goal to "lifetime" goal trying to keep with the ODP philosophy.

I will only address two small parts of your post, because it shows the gap in understanding about what ODP is. Let us say that we strictly review sites in the order they are added, why is that fairer? It's only fairer from the point of view of the site owner who want his site added. Here are some options that I think are fairer.

1. Let's look up the date of registration of the URL, if the site has been around longer, then it should get reviewed first. It's been waiting around the web longer, if it's time sensitive, then it should get added first.

2. Let's run the web site though a grammer analysis, if it's more readable, then it should get listed first. [Actually by reviewing sites with good descriptions first we would implement something like that]

3. How about we go through a two step review. The first editor assigns a point value to a site by a quick view of it, rating from 1-10. The actual reviewing editor reviews the better looking sites first.

4. Maybe we assign a priority to submissions, every time we get a multiple submission, the priority goes down, after all, spammers should get a penalty.

5. How about we do it in reverse date order. After all if I have sites that were submitted two years ago, they are probably out of date, makes more sense to review the one that was submitted today. The two year old sites can just wait a little longer, makes little difference.

--------

Ok, lets say we skip all that and review in order - how does that work let's say the the categories I can edit are Shopping/Toys_and_Games/Stuffed_Animals/ and Science/Biology/Genetics/Eukaryotic/Animal/Mammal/Rodent/

Do I review the sites in date order in Stuffed Animals before reviewing the sites in date order in Mammal/Rodent/ or so I have to keep jumping back and forth. If I have a site in Animal/Mammal/Rodent/ and another in the subcat Animal/Mammal/Rodent/Rats/ do I jump back and forth there?

The possibilities are endless.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

where ... selling products that other sites sell

http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#notinclude

Affiliate Links
Affiliate Reseller Sites
Multi-Level Marketing (MLM)

and http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html#include

Original, unique and valuable informational content that contributes something unique to the category's subject.

If you have read my previous emails, you will see that I did not ask for a 2nd update

Click to expand...

Well, post #4 (with timestamp 07-01-2004, 04:27 AM) does say: "Requesting update" and: "Hey guys - just wanting an update."

So I could probably be forgiven for thinking that it was a request for a second update...

As for my answer being not specific enough, yes, I do understand that can be frustrating, especially if the submitter is an honest person who genuinely believes he or she has done nothing wrong.

The reason for providing only limited information is that some submitters will abuse any snippet of information they can get, to try and have their sites listed even if these have little or no merit from ODP's point of view.

As I said before, the key reason why ODP won't list a site is "insufficient unique content" --so that is typically the reason we give when submitters ask why their sites won't be listed.

I do hope you understand my posts were not directed against you as an individual --I don't even know you!

I do find it frustrating that quite a few people seem to have problems understanding our guidelines. If I gave the impression that "I do not like submitters", then I apologize for that, for it would be a false impression.

OK guys -thanks for all the posts- I knew I would'nt win the war but did want to fight the battle a little - thanks for letting me. You guys are a tough group - I will be back in six months.