It appears that the site submission service is requested hundreds of time a day. It also appears that the Editors and Metas spend hours answering the same question over and over again?
Why dont your engineers design something that AUTOMATICALLY gives that information?
A simple implication 'could' be this:
When suggesting a site, a reference number could be given, (similar to the abuse form).
This reference number could then be used to track whether or not the site has indeed been looked at.
In the perfect world, it would be lovley if there was a reason for rejection, and not the standard 'cop-out' of reading the FAQ. I know that I have read them loads of times, but they are still not clear, as it is in the opinion of the editor and the guidelines that the sites are allowed in.
Offering advice as to why a site has been rejected would also help the internet, as you would have people actually know where they are going wrong, and thus give them an opportunity to remedy to problem.
Your thoughts please:
Simon
Why dont your engineers design something that AUTOMATICALLY gives that information?
A simple implication 'could' be this:
When suggesting a site, a reference number could be given, (similar to the abuse form).
This reference number could then be used to track whether or not the site has indeed been looked at.
In the perfect world, it would be lovley if there was a reason for rejection, and not the standard 'cop-out' of reading the FAQ. I know that I have read them loads of times, but they are still not clear, as it is in the opinion of the editor and the guidelines that the sites are allowed in.
Offering advice as to why a site has been rejected would also help the internet, as you would have people actually know where they are going wrong, and thus give them an opportunity to remedy to problem.
Your thoughts please:
Simon