Site not listed in 2 years....

Hi,

After reading the comment from a user stating that his/her site has not been listed in over 2 years... I find it odd.

Yes I know it is done manually and it is done in the editors free time, but 2 years come on.

I think the best thing the editors who may be reading this, is to help the guy out and see if there are any sites listed in the category that are more recent listings.

Surely this will help to see if the editor has been ignoring his/her's submission.

ryo_zilla

>if there are any sites listed in the category that are more recent listings.
What means "more recent"?
More recently suggested to DMOZ?
More recently created?
More recently updated?
More recently updated whois information?
It all doesn't matter. None of them are relevant during the review proces.

> Surely this will help to see if the editor has been ignoring his/her's submission.
No it won't.
Some reasons:
- suggestions are not assigned to an editor
- many editors are able to "work" in a specific category, but many won't
- an editor might be able to "work" in many categories, maybe he has been very busy in another category as you like him te be active in

>I think the best thing the editors who may be reading this, is to help the guy out and see if there are any sites listed in the category that are more recent listings.

I think the best thing for YOU to do would be to check all sites that are MORE than two years old, and if you can prove that ALL of THEM ARE listed, then ... by your logic, it will be time to give this guy some special consideration.

But obviously not (by your logic) until then.

Let us know when you have that evidence in hand, and we'll tell you where to send it for verification.

Until then, we'll thank you for refraining from giving irrational orders to the volunteers.