Hi, can you tell me the status of www.navicode.com , it was submitted a few months back to http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Searching/Search_Engines/Specialized/Internet_Keywords/
Thanks
Thanks
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Your site says on the front page "As the launch date of the Navicode Registry draws nearer more information will be made available on this site". Unsurprisingly, both of your submissions have been deleted. Feel free to submit again when the site is actually there.
Why do we bother putting all that text on the submission page (including the sentence "Do not submit sites 'under construction'") if no one is going to read any of it.
Why do we bother putting all that text on the submission page (including the sentence "Do not submit sites 'under construction'") if no one is going to read any of it.
Ok. Thanks for your reply.
One point. With it taking several months to get into the open directory, its little wonder that sites are submitting before they are completed.
Do you know what the waiting time would be for this category?
One point. With it taking several months to get into the open directory, its little wonder that sites are submitting before they are completed.
Do you know what the waiting time would be for this category?
Just think how much time we would save if we didn't have to delete under construction sites from the queues? And the amount of time we would save if people always submitted to the correct category. And didn't submit affiliate sites. And submitted decent titles and descriptions. And they at least gave instructions presented to them more than a brief glance. And... Is it little wonder how editors get frustrated?
The waiting times for any category is from a few minutes to (possibly) years. That's as exact as we can be. We can say that "yours is the only site awaiting review" or "there are 1000 other sites in that category awaiting review" - but neither of those is an indication of time. It's entirely possible that the larger queue is reviewed first (as it may attract "higher-up" editors who want to 'zap' large queues), but as in the financial market "past performance is no indicator for future performance."
The waiting times for any category is from a few minutes to (possibly) years. That's as exact as we can be. We can say that "yours is the only site awaiting review" or "there are 1000 other sites in that category awaiting review" - but neither of those is an indication of time. It's entirely possible that the larger queue is reviewed first (as it may attract "higher-up" editors who want to 'zap' large queues), but as in the financial market "past performance is no indicator for future performance."
I realise that it may take time to get a site reviewed, and that there is a temptation to submit too early, but breaking the rules hasn't helped you and it has hindered others. In this case you've annoyed three editors, the two that wasted time rejecting your previous submissions, and now me who had to explain why your site wasn't listed, even though the simplest bit of reading on your part would have established the reason.
Trying to short cut the queue means that your site is now associated with two rejections on the grounds that it has no content. This is likely to make future editors a lot more vigilant when checking any new submissions, so you'd better make sure the site is clearly working and useful the next time you submit it.
No one knows what the waiting time is for any category. Editors are volunteers and they work when they feel like it. Regularly finding a category full up with junk submissions tends to put people off visiting, so the more crap that we receive, the less likely we are to go to that category.
Trying to short cut the queue means that your site is now associated with two rejections on the grounds that it has no content. This is likely to make future editors a lot more vigilant when checking any new submissions, so you'd better make sure the site is clearly working and useful the next time you submit it.
No one knows what the waiting time is for any category. Editors are volunteers and they work when they feel like it. Regularly finding a category full up with junk submissions tends to put people off visiting, so the more crap that we receive, the less likely we are to go to that category.
>With it taking several months to get into the open directory, its little wonder that sites are submitting before they are completed.
The fact is that it DOESN'T take several months to get into the directory.
It takes an AVERAGE of several months to be REVIEWED.
I'd say a solid 5-10% of sites are reviewed within 48 hours! (And another 1-5% may take 18 months or more.) Remember also that a site may be reviewed several times, especially if submitted to an obviously wrong category -- as the majority of submittals are!
It is precisely the arrogant fools who think the submittal guidelines don't apply to them, who are MOST likely to submit to OBVIOUSLY wrong categories, where the editors QUICKLY review them to get them out of the way (sending them elsewhere for the real review.
No, we're not surprises to find a lot of people doing foolish, rude, and counterproductive submittals. For the idiots who are at least trainable, we have the guidelines and the forum.
The fact is that it DOESN'T take several months to get into the directory.
It takes an AVERAGE of several months to be REVIEWED.
I'd say a solid 5-10% of sites are reviewed within 48 hours! (And another 1-5% may take 18 months or more.) Remember also that a site may be reviewed several times, especially if submitted to an obviously wrong category -- as the majority of submittals are!
It is precisely the arrogant fools who think the submittal guidelines don't apply to them, who are MOST likely to submit to OBVIOUSLY wrong categories, where the editors QUICKLY review them to get them out of the way (sending them elsewhere for the real review.
No, we're not surprises to find a lot of people doing foolish, rude, and counterproductive submittals. For the idiots who are at least trainable, we have the guidelines and the forum.
This site has been archived and is no longer accepting new content.