Several re-submits over several years and still nothing

Does DMOZ have the right to refuse a site forever?

Click to expand...

Well it's DMOZ's directory so yes .

It is probably a matter of an editor never having reviewed it the first time around. When the server crashed we lost many suggested URL that had been waiting for upwards of four years for an interested editor to perform a review.

I'm waiting on a site that I suggested as well. At the beginning of this thread, I was siding with Infuseweb. After reading laigh's response, I understand even more about the intent of DMOZ, and I appreciate the services DMOZ editors provide even more so now. So, thank you for maintaining high standards and not giving in to certain requests and perceived notions of what DMOZ is.

With that said, I do believe we could eliminate this discussion by enabling people to view the status of their suggestion. It just seems like a "danged if you do danged if you don't situation," leading to frustration and wasted time. It was mentioned Status Reports were tried to no avail, but something as a courtesy should be implemented. I'm not saying that is DMOZ's priority or problem, but that it could eliminate this type of discussion to free up more time reviewing sites.

Another suggestion would be to allow more people to join as editors. Please know I appreciate the high-level of scrutiny applied towards applicants. However, I have researched library science and indexing for my Master's thesis and I applied to a category from my career field that had a "become an editor" link (not all categories have this link so I assumed it needed an editor), yet I was denied saying the category is full. I just don't understand when we have such a backlog of websites, why aren't more qualified editors allowed to volunteer.

jarrowood,

Regarding your editor application, it would be very unusual to reject an application because the category was full (well represented?).

You most likely received a standard reply containing the phrase below:

Although we would like you to join us as a volunteer editor, you have chosen a category that is already well represented, or is broader than we typically assign to a new editor.

Click to expand...

[Bolding mine]
Most often it is the second, bolded portion that is referring either the the large size of the category or the fact that very few sites would be listed in the area, and thus would not be a great place for a new editor to start out in.

You're absolutely right. That was the notice I received. I would love just a chance to prove I could handle the category. It seems a new editor is better than no editor, but I guess not in every case. :|

I may reapply to the same category and provide addtional reasons why I believe as a new editor I could bring value to the category. Thanks for the rapid response!

jarrowood said:

With that said, I do believe we could eliminate this discussion by enabling people to view the status of their suggestion. It just seems like a "danged if you do danged if you don't situation," leading to frustration and wasted time. It was mentioned Status Reports were tried to no avail, but something as a courtesy should be implemented. I'm not saying that is DMOZ's priority or problem, but that it could eliminate this type of discussion to free up more time reviewing sites.

Click to expand...

There can only be three possible status provided:

1. The site has been reviewed and found to be not listable
2. The site has been reviewed and found listable, therefore its been included.
3. The site has not yet been reviewed by a live human volunteer.

It has been tested here and the results were fairly clear, the answer to the above question is usually #3 but there is no useful/positive/beneficial information that can be gained from any of the responses that could be given. Firstly there is no way to predict by who or when a review will occur. Also, the required action from the submitter/site owner/promoter should be the same no matter which answer applies. - Carry on with other promotion and site building strategies to satisfy the sites target audience/customers.

In the case of #1, there is almost never anyway a site that is not listable could easily be made so. At least not without scrapping the whole thing, firing the design staff, and starting over from the ground up. That is not really a good business decision, IMO. The site should be designed to satisfy the target audience, its customers. Not a third party of volunteers to obtain one more link.

In case #2, the site link will appear (relatively shortly) in the directory after being published. Therefore it would be much easier to navigate to the category or search the directory for the site.

In case# 3, its the most likely scenario really. There is nothing that can be done to speed it up. There is no way to predict when or who the review will be performed by. Site suggestions are but one resource editors have at their disposal for building categories. Some editors rely solely on them, others rarely look at them, still more walk down the middle. Often it depends on the category, but in some large and spammy areas the suggestion may sit for extremely long periods of time. Nothing positive or useful could be derived from either 1 or 3 and most of the time those who would be given #2 already know and don't care to ask.

jarrowood said:

Another suggestion would be to allow more people to join as editors. Please know I appreciate the high-level of scrutiny applied towards applicants. However, I have researched library science and indexing for my Master's thesis and I applied to a category from my career field that had a "become an editor" link (not all categories have this link so I assumed it needed an editor), yet I was denied saying the category is full. I just don't understand when we have such a backlog of websites, why aren't more qualified editors allowed to volunteer.

Click to expand...

As was mentioned, it is very unlikely for anyone to be denied because it is well covered. It is more likely the category was either to broad in scope, too spammy, and/or too large for a new editor in training. We want good, new editors, and as many as we can get. Applications that fall short on some of the basics that can be taught to a new editor, will usually be accepted. Applications should be treated seriously, information provided should be kept honest and with an attempt to follow the guidelines. That is what I would look for in an application - Honesty, a good faith attempt to follow the guidelines, and potential to learn to be a good editor.

<add>Oh and I should add, that real world knowledge in the category subject is a plus, but not a requirement for an editor. Being able to understand and follow the guidelines is the most important factor.<end>

Thanks for the tips. I'm a technical writer by trade and have researched content categorization. So, I know without a shadow575 of a doubt that I have the motivation and potentional to become a great editor.

Though, I have learned a lot here, and I appreciate the effort put into your responses. It's not for nothing search engines favor this directory and why webmasters want their sites in.

....

I came here to inquire whether a few months was a normal wait time for sites to be listed. Looks like it is. Guess I'll just have to keep checking the directory, and crossing my fingers.
I think I have re-submitted one of my sites before, and see from this thread that doing so will just make the wait longer so I won't do that any more. (Couldn't remember whether I submitted the particular site or not.). Maybe it would be good to emphasize that one shouldn't submit more than once on the submission form?

edit again:
I've just realized that a site I'm sure I submitted years ago is not in the directory. Before reading this thread I would have been tempted to re-submit out of not knowing for sure whether I ever submitted it. So count my vote towards having some sort of site status system.

So count my vote towards having some sort of site status system.

Click to expand...

It was tried and failed, it is highly improbable that we would attempt it again.

After reading all this I am still confused

Hi everyone,

I have had success with other sites getting listed within a few weeks but I have one now that is going on a year without a listing. I have submitted to different directories thinking I had it wrong. I also made the mistake of submitting to the same category every month or so thinking I was doing something wrong. I always revised the listing before re-submitting thinking this was an acceptable reason to resubmit. What concerns me is that these issues are not addressed in an easy to use and understandable way. It's hard if not impossible to NOT re-submit if time drags into more than 6 months. I have even considered becoming an editor since my category does not have one and the listings included are old, out of date, changed or my direct competition which has always annoyed me considering I can't seem to get listed. My site ranks number one through 5 in all search engines except AOL, Google and DMOZ. AOL I really don't care about but Google and DMOZ I do. Would it be wise to apply to become an editor? Not just to get my site listed within the directory but to help out with a category that seems to have been overlooked and a sub category of a rather enormous one? I agree with what DMOZ stands for and it seems that you need the help quickly. You even have an incorrect link with a redirect that hasn't been corrected...you still list "WISENUT"...please advise.

Thanks in advance, Dave

I also made the mistake of submitting to the same category every month or so thinking I was doing something wrong. I always revised the listing before re-submitting thinking this was an acceptable reason to resubmit.

Click to expand...

Please stop. The guidelines are clear to submit ONCE to the best category for your site. You only move the submission date further ahead and further down the list should an editor decide to review sites by date, and eventually sufficient submissions may get flagged as abusive (eg spam).

It's hard if not impossible to NOT re-submit if time drags into more than 6 months.

Click to expand...

Is someone forcing you to resubmit?

I have even considered becoming an editor since my category does not have one and the listings included are old, out of date, changed or my direct competition which has always annoyed me considering I can't seem to get listed.

Click to expand...

There are over 200 editors who can edit anywhere in the directory. As well, any editor of a category can edit in any sub-category further down the tree. Any changed or unresponsive sites can be reported in our quality control thread here ...
http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5453

AOL I really don't care about but Google and DMOZ I do.

Click to expand...

We really have no control or connection with Google. They simply use our data for their directory. You can submit seperately to their search engine for indexing rather than wait for them to find your site.

Would it be wise to apply to become an editor? Not just to get my site listed within the directory but to help out with a category that seems to have been overlooked and a sub category of a rather enormous one?

Click to expand...

If you can work impartially, on competitors sites as well as your own, pick a category that interests you that isn't too large and apply. We always need good editors.

Thank you for your reply.

No...no one is "forcing" me to resubmit but the lack of feedback causes some concern considering certain search engines rely on DMOZ to power their core directory services. The word POWER takes on a rather ominous quality. In addition stating that there are "over" 200 editors causes even more concern, or is this a statement similar to the submission statement that is can take 2 weeks to 6 months to get listed when it could really take years? Or just a typo? It makes it hard to take comments seriously when key statements are vague and leave an enormous open end. With the millions of websites around the world waiting to get listed without feedback for over 6 months by human nature would lend one to believe that they have been overlooked by the "over 200" editors. How many sites are submitted in any given day? That would certainly be an informative number put against the true number of editors. It would be interesting to make these numbers public. One would then be able to personally interpret the odds of getting listed.

"The Open Directory Project is the largest, most comprehensive human-edited directory of the Web. It is constructed and maintained by a vast, global community of volunteer editors."

Now does "vast" = 200 or does it equal over 71,000?

"The Open Directory powers the core directory services for the Web's largest and most popular search engines and portals, including Netscape Search, AOL Search, Google, Lycos, HotBot, DirectHit, and hundreds of others."

(taken from: http://www.dmoz.org/about.html)

If you don't have control or connection with Google they why make the statement above?

I sense a lot of arrogance when reading editor replies to submittal questions and based on the statement above obtaining a listing with DMOZ seems equivalent to throwing holy water on a website.

I would venture a guess that if actual hard numbers were applied to the site’s “About DMOZ” page that the number or resubmissions would be greatly reduced and I would think that this would lessen the burden on editors having to answer questions such as mine.

I DON’T have to DO anything but the power this site has been given seems to me to be misplaced. The implied comments that I don’t need to submit to DMOZ may be true and I would not if I didn’t HAVE TO. Do the math. I don’t appreciate tongue in cheek comments and undeserved arrogance. I am a professional and expect to be treated with respect. I work very hard and do all that I can to follow sometime rather vague rules. I may not agree with what is required but I do my best to comply. But the fact that I have taken my valuable time to write this should give you some idea of how seriously I take submitting to DMOZ.

Thanks again for your reply.

To address just your questions about the editor numbers, the "200+" figure you see being used refers to the number of editors with editall permissions -- this means they are able to edit anywhere in the directory as they choose. The 70,000ish number that you see on the front page of http://www.dmoz.org/ is the total number of editor accounts that have ever existed. The number of current active editor accounts somewhere between the two.

Some time earlier today the number of active editor accounts was 5,805. I don't have a figure for the exact number of editors with editall permissions, but the combined number of full editalls and cateditalls at some point earlier today was 297.

These number are public information, since you can deduce them by careful counting of http://www.dmoz.org/edoc/editorlist.txt (watch for duplicates) and http://www.dmoz.org/edoc/editall.html .

Now does "vast" = 200 or does it equal over 71,000?

Click to expand...

Neither. Both number have their contex.

71,000 is the number of ediors since the beginning of the project
200, as stated, is the number of editors who have permission to exit anywhere in the directory.

~7,000 is the current number of editors who ahve an active log-in.

I sense a lot of arrogance when reading editor replies to submittal questions

Click to expand...

We tire of repeaing the same answers over, and over, and over, especially hwen they are in the FAQ, or are the result of people half-reading sentences, or selectively understanding what they are being told. Case in point, every questions you have asked has already been answered many times on this site.

I am a professional and expect to be treated with respect

Click to expand...

And we expect the same respect.

We also expect you to respect our suggestion guidelines. We also don't appreciate being told that it is hard or impossible not to resuggest your site in disregard to the guidelines.

I DON’T have to DO anything

Click to expand...

Good, it appears we are both in agreement that you will not continue to suggest your site.

I work very hard and do all that I can to follow sometime rather vague rules. I may not agree with what is required but I do my best to comply.

Click to expand...

The following quotation is taken from the submission instructions page which you confirmed that you had read and agreed to abide by each time you suggested your site. I wouldn't say that it's vague or hard to follow.

Please only submit a URL to the Open Directory once. Again, multiple submissions of the same or related sites may result in the exclusion and/or deletion of those and all affiliated sites.

Click to expand...

Public Submissions

Hi Jim, sorry to drag up an oldish statement, but it caught my attention.

jimnoble said:

...Is it more valuable or worthy just because the owner says so? Of course it isn't.

Click to expand...

Maybe so, but only if we presume her guilty of self-promotion ahead of interest in the subject matter in which they have a professional commitment to. Alternatively, it is more valuable, because a *human* says so.

By taking submissions from the public, you're allowing a feed of content that has already passed a human's analysis of suitability and taxonomy. You're enabling a *huge* pool of first-pass editors to contribute - allowing anyone to add a little value to the ODP without committing time themselves as an ODP editor.

So many community websites maintain their own link lists - if only they would collectively maintain the link lists on ODP instead of their own sites, everyone would benefit. I really want to encourage everyone in my community to post URL submissions to the ODP.

I haven't seen first hand the quality of submissions (yet - still waiting on my editor approval), so maybe I'm being too idealistic. But even as an editor, my interests will include categories outside of my editorial control - I would want to believe that my submissions to those categories will be taken seriously, even though I do not have the available time to edit those categories.

The trick, I guess is to weed out the submissions that put self-interest above the community. After reading some more postings on these forums, it looks like my initial views on this topic are *way* too idealistic.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Regards,
Ben Hatton.

I'll accept that some websites are suggested by interested third parties - but they're a drop in the ocean.

The majority of complaints that we aren't volunteering hard enough are made by those prioritising on promoting their own websites.

The thing is, editing is a hobby and editors have the freedom to set their own priorities. If you think that's a problem, become part of the solution .

dwsnead said:

"The Open Directory powers the core directory services for the Web's largest and most popular search engines and portals, including Netscape Search, AOL Search, Google, Lycos, HotBot, DirectHit, and hundreds of others."
(taken from: http://www.dmoz.org/about.html)

Click to expand...

Hi dwsnead,

The power you speak of is only an illusion. The fact that other web portals use ODP data can simply be because we have strict guidelines to ensure quality content.

If an outside search engine is your concern you can easily go to that search engine's website and look over their advertising packages. ODP is it's own thing and we build it for the visitors that come DIRECTLY to us in search of information.

I hope this helps

infuseweb said:

Sure, when it takes 2 years to process a request is it any wonder? Especially when the system crashed and we had to resubmit again, and then there is nothing to indicate your status in the queue, and the fact that requests aren't even reviewed in any particular order. So when you say "resubmitting pushes your request to the list of domains further out" what does that actually mean? lol.

Why not put some sort of cross check to check the queue and if it sees the domain is already submitted then display a warning message saying "hey, we got your request and it's still processing...if you submit now, your request will be pushed to the bottom of the queue" (which isn't processed in any particular order). That would stop resubmissions pretty quickly, no?

So can anyone tell me where my request is in the "queue" and if it will ever get added?

Click to expand...

In a roundabout way you have the same expectations that I have of DMOZ - that their systems and infrastructure is professional and works to aid the people that use the site.

From my limited experience they do not deploy enough resources or downlevel responsibility in order to be an innovative business service.

In the long term, I suspect that the project will fail and another orgnaisation will create a much more credible, professional and state of the art directory.

In the interim, your patience will be your only saviour!

From my limited experience they do not deploy enough resources or downlevel responsibility in order to be an innovative business service.

Click to expand...

You are 100% right! The ODP is not any kind of business service, and has never claimed to be one. Glad we got that sorted out.

Now please stop posting the same message to lots of different threads. That is bad netiquette, and on some forums might be interepreted as trolling.

[edited to add: Ah, I see you got what was coming to you.]