"for me that's enough"
You say there are many posts with no content, but there were exactly 4 out of over 50, and they were marked clearly that the content was pending. In this case, having the post in place was valuable to the reader - in fact they were in response to reader requests. 3 of them now have content. Perhaps at the time you looked, those were recent posts, but had you looked at the contents you would have seen dozens of additional, full posts.
As for offering advertising for "adult massage industry" when did that become sufficient to be "enough for you" to classify the site as adult? There are no graphic banners, no blatant adult content, and the language is well moderated.
DMOZ has set clear guidelines that "adult" doesn't mean "pornography". Sensual massage is an "adult" topic, but it is not a "pornographic" topic and there are DMOZ rules for handling this. DMOZ editors are always quick to send users to the Guidelines. Here I reference your own guidelines:
Sites that would be listed in the main directory rather than in Adult include, but are not limited to:
* Sites covering human sexuality whose dominant theme is to educate and inform.
* Sites covering human sexuality whose dominant the theme is the provision of information that has literary, artistic, political and scientific value.
* Sites covering a societal or lifestyle issue and/or a support or advice group of sorts that do not contain sexually explicit or pornographic material.
* Sites that include sexually suggestive, risqué material, but not sexually explicit material as defined above. (e.g. romance/erotica writing, swimsuit issues of sports magazines, etc.)
The site in question fits these descriptions very well. In addition, the guidelines describe the use of advertising on such sites as follows:
Links and Banners: Sites that exist to drive traffic to Adult sites should be listed in Adult. Sites that contain sexually explicit banner and sidebar ads should also be listed in Adult. However, sites that do not exist to drive traffic to adult sites, but may include non-sexually explicit points to adult sites, may be listed outside the Adult category. When you can't decide if an otherwise non-adult site containing adult links and banners should be listed in Adult or not, ask the question: "would this organization take the time and effort to make this web site available if they were not profiting off of the adult links and banners" -- if the answer is "no" then the site is a likely candidate for the Adult category.
so there you have an explicit guideline to determine that this site is not *required* to be in Adult. It is in no way an affiliate link site, and obviously exists on it's own wihout adult advertising.
I am confident that the Internet surfer is best served if this site gets listed in both Adult and main directories, as it is of interest to people looking in both places.
I note that even the initial request (which was not required to be in "adult" by your guidelines, and where I asked "please don't justthrow tis into Adult") was, in fact, thorwn into Adult (even when I was not being granted a password).
Thank you for the re-consideration.
