Time frames should be updated...

I would recommend upating your About ODP page. Under About ODP > Submitting a Site > How long does it take for my site to be listed in the ODP? it says "it may take up to 2 weeks or more for your site to be reviewed".

However, your page: http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showforum=10 has an "Important" note right as the very first thread reading "How to get your site listed FOUR times faster!". The first bullet on this page quotes "Sites that are submitted to the "right category" (meaning the category where they ultimately get listed) get listed four times faster than those submitted to other categories.".

We submitted our site approximately 7-10 weeks ago. We submitted our site to the proper category, which was researched extensively. Does this mean that our site (if reviewed 4 times faster, would be 4-5 days?). Granted, you do have a VERY vague parachute of "2 weeks OR MORE". Or does this imply that if takes us 10 weeks (which I still have not seen any notification), the time it takes the other 70% of people would be 4 months?

Personally, I would change your time frames from "2 weeks or more" to a much more realistic time frame. Perhaps 3 months mor more. Then really work hard to respect this time frame. DMOZ IS a phenominal site, does require alot of talented resources, and requires time to review submissions, however, the time frames do need some assistance.

Keep up the great work, and perhaps consider an update to your time frames on your page: http://dmoz.org/help/submit.html#howlong

An update would be greatly appreciated.

By the way, I don't think we have an active editor under our category (Top: Business: Arts and Entertainment: Photography: Stock: Royalty Free (208) ) what happens in this case? (If I am wrong, please advise).

Regards,

Michael
<url removed>

We submitted our site approximately 7-10 weeks ago. We submitted our site to the proper category, which was researched extensively. Does this mean that our site (if reviewed 4 times faster, would be 4-5 days?). Granted, you do have a VERY vague parachute of "2 weeks OR MORE". Or does this imply that if takes us 10 weeks (which I still have not seen any notification), the time it takes the other 70% of people would be 4 months?

Click to expand...

"Four times faster" is saying "I've told you a million times" -- it's not meant to indicate a precise measurement of something. It just means that suggesting your listable site to the wrong category will slow down the time it will take for an editor to actually review and list the site by a significant amount. How much it will slow down the process is not something that really can be quantified.

It says ""it may take up to 2 weeks or more for your site to be reviewed". That means that it might take less than two weeks or it might take more. Yes, it could be worded better and that has been suggested before. It's not something that editors have the ability to edit but we'll be sure to pass that on.

Thank you...

Thank you Motsa...

Actually, "four times faster" is a pretty precise number based on doing statistics on a lot of incoming suggestions (that were listed). However, as the basis is a wide range of intervals, it can in no way be used to estimate the time frame until a listable suggestion is reviewed. And it does not affect visible results of unlistable suggestions; never divided by 4 is still never.

The important fact is that suggestion to the right category (often not where you'd prefer) help editors avoid wasting time on moving sites around, and instead build the directory - which may include reviewing sites correctly suggested to the category they have chosen to work in.

But I do agree that the "2 weeks" is likely to interpreted more literarily than meant, and this is on the list for a revision of the documentation.

Sounds good...

Sounds good... Just out of curiosity, how many editors are there and how many sites are submitted on a daily basis? I can only imagine the daunting task of reviewing sites. Reviewing images isn't quite so bad... Especially when they involve biknis, but sites would be quite a bit tougher...

Does DMOZ currently send any type of rejection note when a site is rejected? Only a suggestion here, but if not, perhaps a note saying why a site was rejected could be looked into, only to refrain those from re-submitting and "clogging up the system" sort of speak...

I think the big thing people really need to understand is the work on this site is VOLUNTARY!

Good work guys....

Michael.

These ODP Status Reports may help to answer some of your questions. I'm not sure the number of public suggestions is included though.

Does DMOZ currently send any type of rejection note when a site is rejected?

Click to expand...

No.

Only a suggestion here,

Click to expand...

It has been suggested many times here, and there are several reasons why this would not necessarily be a good idea. (It might make those suggesting sites a bit happier, but would it actually help further the directory's aims and objectives?) I suggest you do a forum search to find them if you're interested.

What most people don't understand about the editors is that there are various levels of editing permissions, which means where in the Directory an editor has permission to edit.

A newly accepted editor is restricted to a very small category, both to limit the possible damage he could do to the Directory, and as a training ground to learn in.

As an editor learns how to edit properly, becomes more proficient, and proves himself trustworthy, he can request permission to edit in other categories. A lot of editors have no such desire, they stay in one small category, and as with all editors, edit when they have the time and desire to.

Other editors, like all of the editors who post here, become very involved in editing as their interests dictate, and earn the trust and responsibility of editing in extremely large and wide areas of the Directory.

I, myself started editing in a small city (locality) and became so interested that I now edit in all localities within the United States, as well as, a couple of specialized topical categories that I have a special interest in.

I don't consider this a promotion or a reward, it's a neccessary tool that I need to accomplish certain tasks that I can't do without those permissions.

The number of site suggestions available to me is measured in the tens of thousands.

The meta editors edit in every part of the Directory, and what's available to them measures in the hundreds of thousands, as well as, a great deal of other time consuming responsibilities.

The number of site suggestions available to an editor limited to a small category might range from 0-20.

So, the abilities and editing permissions of various editors range from A to A-Z, and everything in between, involves the free time they wish and can devote to editing, and their own special interests for editing as a hobby.

We're just normal, everyday people, like yourself, who have volunteered for a community project that will benefit the community of worldwide web surfers looking for information.

There are no egos because there is always someone who knows more than you do, and we are self regulated. In other words, we watch each other, and are subject to being corrected by our peers should we get off track, and there are some extremely talented, knowledgeable, and experienced folk among us, like our metas.

Interesting...

Thanks Crowbar! It really gives a good understanding as to what goes on behind the scenes...

Years ago, and to date, I had thought about becoming an editor, however with running 3 businesses, wife et all, I already burn the candle at both ends. I applaud the efforts that go into this. From reading all the posts, everyone always wishes reviews could happen sooner, but realistically with the numbers you have just mentioned, I am quite impressed that approvals happen as fast as they do! (One of our other sites was approved surprsingly quickly, mind you that was about 4 years ago, things have changed.).

As we do in the imaging industry, I am sure you to must also shake your head at some submissions...

Thanks again Crowbar!

Michael.

As there is no first in, first out system , many editors like myself have their own systems of editing. Some editors will go by date of submission, but we're not required to.

I pay no particular attention at all to date of submission, I look for site suggestions that the submitter has taken the time to write an ODP compliant title and description for first. As those are fairly rare, they stand out from most of the key word and sales hype stuffed descriptions that usually get submitted.

If there happens to be 10,000 suggestions, scattered across 50 states, where I edit on a particular day is like throwing a dart, it really doesn't matter where it lands. One of those may have been suggested the day before and get reviewed and added, or it may have been there for several years.

The public sees us as a listing service for site owners. That is completely false.

We're only interested in building a library of good information for the web surfer.

That is why the date of submission is irrelevant to us. Whether a site suggestion was submitted yesterday or several years ago, it has nothing to do with whether the suggestion will add value to a category, only the unique content on the site will do that.