The category I submitted to has no editor

S

swapx

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
16
I submitted my site to DMOZ quite few months ago to the gamling equipment category. Since then the category has been broken into 2 subcategories and apparently my submission is still in review status in the original catagory I submitted to. But that category does not have an editor. What happens in this case? Can I resubmit to one of the new sub categories that do have an editor if they are appropriate for my site?

Or is there any way to change the requested category?

thanks,

swapx
 
thehelper

thehelper

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2002
Messages
4,996
You should drop by the submission status request forum and find out what is going on with the submission. That would be the first step. I would not resubmit if you think you are already there until you at least ask about a submission status. Make sure you follow that forum's post format guidelines as they are specific. Hope this helps.
 
S

swapx

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
16
I did post on the status request board over a month ago and received a reply that my site is still awaiting review and the reply even indicated the category, but that category does not have an editor.

Now what?
 
jgwright

jgwright

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
256
I assure you the site has an editor. See the FAQ link provided to you by photofox. 100s or 1000s of editors will be able to manage the category in question.

I think the best advice is to not worry about this and leave it be. The suggestion will be reviewed.
 
H

hutcheson

Curlie Meta
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
19,136
There appears to be a basic fundamental contradiction in your statements. How can "the category be broken into categories" without an editor being involved? I assure you, categories do not undergo spontaneous fission -- and any allegation that ODP data is radioactive is not likely to be received well here.
 
S

swapx

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
16
-- and any allegation that ODP data is radioactive is not likely to be received well here.
Click to expand...

What allegation? Why are you so defensive about a simple question. Are we not to post any honest questions here? What are these forums for?

swapx
 
jgwright

jgwright

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
256
What allegation?
Click to expand...
:D Don't worry, the question was understood, nobody's being defensive. Best to relax, leave it. The fact of the two subcategories being created subsequent to your suggestion will not be a hindrance.
 
H

hutcheson

Curlie Meta
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
19,136
Fission -- break into two parts
Spontaneous -- no editor/no visible cause
"Susceptible to spontaneous fission" == "radioactive"

What DO they teach in schools these days? Not logic or humor or science, apparently.

Irony is, I suspect, right out. You do realize how hard that makes it to communicate? Maybe I just should post a picture of myself gesticulating wildly.
 
S

swapx

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
16
hutcheson said:
Fission -- break into two parts
Spontaneous -- no editor/no visible cause
"Susceptible to spontaneous fission" == "radioactive"

What DO they teach in schools these days? Not logic or humor or science, apparently.
Click to expand...

Sorry, how dumb of me. I didn't see the humor in that. But the real irony is that my major in Ga Tech was nuclear engineering. Go figure!!!

keep up the good work,

cheers,

SwapX
 
J

jjwill

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
422
hutcheson said:
There appears to be a basic fundamental contradiction in your statements. How can "the category be broken into categories" without an editor being involved? I assure you, categories do not undergo spontaneous fission -- and any allegation that ODP data is radioactive is not likely to be received well here.
Click to expand...


Just so you know, I laughed.

I think people aren't expecting humor when they come to the ODP. They forget it's not a machine running in the background.

You just aren't appreciated enough hutcheson. :D
 
miromulus

miromulus

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
570
hutcheson said:
Fission -- break into two parts
Spontaneous -- no editor/no visible cause
"Susceptible to spontaneous fission" == "radioactive"

What DO they teach in schools these days? Not logic or humor or science, apparently.

Irony is, I suspect, right out. You do realize how hard that makes it to communicate? Maybe I just should post a picture of myself gesticulating wildly.
Click to expand...

Actualy, the first part (spontaneous fission) is corect, but radioactivity is not always produced by spontaneus fission. That made the comment a little unclear.
 
This site has been archived and is no longer accepting new content.
Top