Unique Content?

Obviously we're not communicating yet. It is precisely because of the "ODP principles and methods" that there are things we cannot know.

One of those things is how long it will be after a site is published that it is reviewed. Nobody knows that, nobody can ever know that. You can ask the same question as many times as you like, there's really only one answer. "Because of the way we work, (details specified so you can comprehend if you wish) we cannot know that."

You may have noticed that editors show very little tolerance for the kind of vague insinuations that you've made about bad listings. If you know a listed site that isn't listable, speak up like an honest man, name the site -- either using "update listing" when the site is up, or using the "quality feedback" forum when it's down.

And you'd be AMAZED how different the reaction is, when you have information to help people, rather than just general abuse to hurl at them.

Try it sometime.

but no-one can tell you why a site has to wait for years to get listed when sites of very similiar content are listed even when you know for certainty that it was submitted years after yours because the site didn't even exist until such and such a time.

Click to expand...

I can give some more possibilities:

Perhaps a passing editor randomly selected the later site to look at while 'passing through' the target category, but didn't have time / feel inclined to look at all of the sites.

This could have been made less random by the later site being submitted with with a near-perfect title and description (and so was pulled out of the pool by something thinking it would be an easy add) and/or by the earlier site having a poor title/description (so being seen as more work).

Or perhaps your site happened to be down, or didn't work correctly in the editors' browser, or required a plug-in they didn't have, when they tried to review it. In this case the site would be left for another day.

Perhaps your site was submitted more than once, and the editor operates a policy of going through a category and reviewing every site which followed the submission instructions (only submit once) and leaving the rest for someone else to do later.

Alternatively perhaps the later site was never submitted to the target category at all. As others have said, it might have been found by the editor by other means. It also might have been mis-submitted elsewhere, and an editor reviewed the site and then, after taking the trouble to find the right category, thought they might as well list it straight away. Perhaps the later site was submitted correctly to its localitcategory in Scotland and an editor reviewing it for listing there also took it on him/her-self to list it in the topical category at the same time.

Or, possibly the owner of the later is an editor, and he's listed his own site and ignored yours. Not that this is necessarily abuse, but abuse can and does happen. It's not nearly as common as some people here would make you think. Rest assured that we have systems in place to detect and deal with such abuse.

no-one can tell you why a site has to wait for years to get listed ...

Click to expand...

Quite apart from the patient and helpful replies given above, this point is raised in no less than three of the FAQ linked at the top of this forum, viz

How long until my site will be reviewed?
Why did you list my competitor before you listed me?
Why are you refusing to list my site when there are much worse sites already listed?

Click to expand...

I went into ASDA the other day. I needed toothpaste.

The rack contained some 50 or more different types. The third one that I cast my eye on seemed suitable, was a reasonable price, and therefore I didn't look at all the rest, nor did I care about the 200 other types that they don't stock.




Likewise for a surfer wanting a site about a particular subject and choosing to look to the ODP to help him find it. As long as the ODP can deliver the surfer to a site that contains the particular factoids the surfer wanted we aren't bothered if every single place that factoid can be found is listed here. In fact, after a time, it becomes unproductive to list any more of them. And we always try to avoid listing multiple sites if they are all the same entity generating their content.

If an editor decides that a category is lacking in sites, and is not wholesome in its coverage of the topic, then that editor will take ownership of the "problem" and review more sites for possible inclusion.

It is quite possible that the "best" site may never be added. To work out which is the "best" you would have to review every site and score and sort them all before you could even add the very first one. Editors tend to add sites that are "good enough", but the discovery of some exceptionally good site might be a trigger for some of the (now found to be) lower-quality sites to be re-reviewed and possibly removed.

Great explanations and examples, it really does happen that way, .

hutcheson said:

We talk, instead, about "sites with significant unique information"...

Click to expand...

I am a creator of copyright works, therefore I do have unique information that no-one else has - I have done for over three years but your beloved surfers (my potential customers) know nothing about it.

hutcheson said:

Obviously we're not communicating yet....You can ask the same question as many times as you like...

Click to expand...

I believe I've only posted the once.

hutcheson said:

You may have noticed that editors show very little tolerance for the kind of vague insinuations that you've made about bad listings. If you know a listed site that isn't listable, speak up like an honest man, name the site....

Click to expand...

I didn't feel that would be a good idea in a public forum. Perhaps I will use the update listing but there was really no need to be so abrupt.

hutcheson said:

And you'd be AMAZED how different the reaction is, when you have information to help people, rather than just general abuse to hurl at them. Try it sometime.

Click to expand...

Where the hell did that come from? You sure know how to make people feel welcome. Tell me what is the point of having a forum where our most basic questions cannot be answered? Where the very people that provide the content for the surfers are treated like scum (no offense to the other editors who have been rather more approachable). And why have half a dozen editors sat answering unanswerable questions when they could be looking up more content and serving both surfers and frustrated information providers? After all that's what it's all about isn't it?

Unbelievable!

your beloved surfers (my potential customers) know nothing about it.

Click to expand...

There are milions of sites not included in the ODP, and yet they can easily be found on the internet. After all, that is exactly how editors found many of the sites that are now listed.

I didn't feel that would be a good idea in a public forum.

Click to expand...

Please see our public Quality Control Feedback forum.

Oh!

Thanks for the comments about why certain sites might get overlooked over others, particularly those about possible inclusions through seeing an ad or finding content through other means and not the list of submitted sites waiting for review by ODP editors.

Sorry to be a bit tongue in cheek but it's nice to know that editors ocassionally include sites that haven't been submitted personally. Since I have already stated in which category I'd like my site to be listed I'm surprised an editor of the category hasn't thought...

"Actually, since I've added some sites to this category which manifestly can only contain a fairly low finite number of institutions, why don't I spend a couple of minutes to see whether there are some other sites out there in this category which contain equally useful information. Who knows? I might even discover that there are only about 20 possible inclusions in the category and since there are already 12 or 13 in it it seems a tad unfair that I've come across 1, added it and neglected to consider whether it's a fairly simple process to make the category "complete".

I'd be quite happy as editor to have achieved something like this.

Anticipated response:

We editors are only human and can't be expected to spend all our lives searching for sites to "complete" a category.

Answer:

Yes. You do a great job. The ODP is an impressive collection of personally reviewed sites and is therefore a testament to the editors who give up their time to achieve this...........BUT.............please ocassionally consider that some categories are small, are extremely important to the providers of references within the category and CAN be extensively researched with minimal fuss.

some categories are small, are extremely important ... and CAN be extensively researched with minimal fuss.

Click to expand...

That is precisely why we are constantly suggesting people apply to be editors of these sorts of categories.

Since I have already stated in which category I'd like my site to be listed I'm surprised an editor of the category hasn't thought...

Click to expand...

Quite aside from the fact that we are unable to edit at the moment, this forum is not a path to expedite a review. Someone will get to that category when they get to it. Posting here doesn't speed up the process.

Anticipated response:

We editors are only human and can't be expected to spend all our lives searching for sites to "complete" a category.

Click to expand...

It's more a case of this: until someone decides that "right now I need to complete that category more than anything I could be doing", a category will remain incomplete. Some editors spend all of their time ensuring that the categories that they edit are as complete as possible but that's really only possible when you are the editor of a few small categories. When I first started as an editor, I went to a great deal of trouble to make sure that the category I edited was nauseatingly complete. Then I moved on to bigger categories and more responsibilities and I suspect that original category is now no longer complete by any stretch of the imagination but making it complete is now really low on my list of priorities.

Yes. You do a great job. The ODP is an impressive collection of personally reviewed sites and is therefore a testament to the editors who give up their time to achieve this...........BUT.............please ocassionally consider that some categories are small, are extremely important to the providers of references within the category and CAN be extensively researched with minimal fuss.

Click to expand...

Here's the problem with that: The ODP is filled with a lot of small categories (and no-so-small), most of which are considered important to the people who have sites that could be listed in them. This one category is no more important, from an editor point of view or really from a user point of view, than any of those thousands of other categories that are not as complete as they could be.

Where did that come from?

That was for hamboid's broad-brush slur:

why does it seem, at least, that what are competitors to us business people and pieces of "information" to the ODP seem to get listed even though their business started years after yours started and was submitted to the ODP, has virtually identical "informative" content about their "informations" (products to everyone else) and in many cases are blatantly flouting what all other directories and search engines consider to be spam.

Click to expand...

No details, nothing to check, nothing to confirm or deny, just your basic drive-by character assassination.

Now if someone had said, "why is example.com listed in the Celebrities/E category? It looks like porn doorway spam to me!" -- almost certainly, not one but several people would look at the site within hours, to see if there was something that needed attention. And there's a good chance someone would say something like "thanks, if you find any more of them, here's the easiest way to tell us so we can check and clean up the mess."

And there's a fairly good chance you'd have gotten an expression of gratitude even if you had accompanied the useful information with that sort of passing slur--because information is valuable to us.

One more bit of confusion:

I am a creator of copyright works, therefore I do have unique information that no-one else has...

Click to expand...

I don't know where you're coming from here. In this country, copyright doesn't cover information (it covers a tangible expression of an idea, which is not the same thing at all), so whether you have a copyright or not is completely irrelevant.

Separate aside: I don't know why you think hamboid provides information for us. I'd take the other side of that at odds.

As for answering unanswerable questions, that's because they're asked. It's hard to tell, sometimes, whether someone is obtuse, or belligerent, or deceived by lies they've heard somewhere else (and need lots of deprogramming.)

As for the forum, it may be either an obligation voluntarily taken on, or a break from more difficult work. Each editor may have his own reasons, and -- just as for editing -- I can't speak for anyone but myself. But you don't have the right to ask anyone to account to you for where they spend their time, and why. (I wonder if this isn't be the root of all your problems: you are frustrated because you said "frog" and -- six billion people on earth and not ONE of them jumped. But that's people, live with them or migrate to another planet.)

Beyond that, of your basic questions that CAN be answered, which of them haven't been answered, to the level of detail you'd like?

hutcheson said:

Now if someone had said, "why is example.com listed in the Celebrities/E category? It looks like porn doorway spam to me!" -- almost certainly, not one but several people would look at the site within hours, to see if there was something that needed attention. And there's a good chance someone would say something like "thanks, if you find any more of them, here's the easiest way to tell us so we can check and clean up the mess."

And there's a fairly good chance you'd have gotten an expression of gratitude even if you had accompanied the useful information with that sort of passing slur--because information is valuable to us.

Click to expand...

I don't actually want any site to be excluded from the ODP and I certainly don't want to name and shame my competitors in an open forum. I wanted clarification of how certain sites that appear to be less honest / legitimate get overlooked before others that have been waiting for review (e.g. mine).

Like many people who post on this forum (and it is a forum isn't it?), I am quite frustrated and perhaps don't just come here to tell the ODP how wonderful it is.

My question (albeit frustratedly phrased) was actually answered by chaos127 in an intelligent, honest and competent way.

Hutcheson may have noticed that I also posed another question about whether or not editors tried to complete categories which they felt could be done with relative ease. Again motsa and makrhod gave relevant answers / comments to this.

I wanted clarification of how certain sites that appear to be less honest / legitimate get overlooked before others that have been waiting for review (e.g. mine).

Click to expand...

Once again, the FAQ has this covered:

• Why did you list my competitor before you listed me?
• Why are you refusing to list my site when there are much worse sites already listed?

Click to expand...

Thanks again to Makrhod and others for sharing as much as you are allowed to within the remit of the ODP. I signed up to this forum only last night and discovered this thread which I felt was most relevant to my concerns. It's clear I didn't know enough about the ODP but am learning fast!

What I didn't expect was to receive such a hostile retort from one of the moderators. However, looking at the other threads this appears to be a common occurrence, so I'll try not to take it too personally.

hutcheson said:

(with regard to BAD sites)...almost certainly, not one but several people would look at the site within hours, to see if there was something that needed attention.

Click to expand...

If the 'bad' sites can get so much attention from so many people within so short a time...no, I won't even go there. Incidentally, the site I referred to was the very first one I clicked on in my sector - I hadn't seen the name before.

hutcheson said:

One more bit of confusion: I don't know where you're coming from here. In this country, copyright doesn't cover information (it covers a tangible expression of an idea, which is not the same thing at all), so whether you have a copyright or not is completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

I know precisely what I'm referring to but as I understand it I'm not allowed to divulge details of my site here. I was using the term 'information' here with reference to the data contained in my work. If copyright works are not of interest to the ODP then why are my competitors listed at all? They are offering nothing more.

hutcheson said:

As for answering unanswerable questions, that's because they're asked. It's hard to tell, sometimes, whether someone is obtuse, or belligerent, or deceived by lies they've heard somewhere else (and need lots of deprogramming.)

Click to expand...

Not difficult to judge which category you fall into. By all means deprogram me but there are better ways which generally involve good manners and clear advice.

hutcheson said:

Beyond that, of your basic questions that CAN be answered, which of them haven't been answered, to the level of detail you'd like?

Click to expand...

No doubt I have all the answers I'm going to get and am happy to leave you to abusing your other forum members. But I really don't think your cantankerous attitude is really doing this forum or the ODP any favours. Do you?

Thank you Mr.H (perhaps Mrs? - wrong time of the month?) for your hospitality.

Good day.

hutcheson said:

As for answering unanswerable questions, that's because they're asked.

Click to expand...

They wouldn't be asked if there wasn't a forum and this is an utterly pointless forum IMO. And you talk so highly about great contributions to the web.

cwillsher said:

They wouldn't be asked if there wasn't a forum and this is an utterly pointless forum IMO. And you talk so highly about great contributions to the web.

Click to expand...

Just as with everything in live it is utterly pointless if you try to use it for things it is not meant to be used for.
As we can see over and over again both here and at DMOZ is that people just don't read the information (guidelines, faq, etc) provided to them.

Good morning, cwillsher, .

We really can't get into questions like, "Why did that site get listed, and this one didn't"

With over 4 million sites and 74,719 editors, each with their own style of editing, various levels of skill, experience, and editing permissions, we would have to go investigate the category, and all the listings, and all of the editor notes in order to give you an answer, which isn't practical, and which would only open up a debate between the questioner and ourselves.

I think what we're trying to do here is to give you as much of an inside look at the ODP as we're allowed to, so you understand the process a little better.

For instance, I can tell you that when I edit, I, personally, do not edit sites by date of submission.

First, I go through the site suggestions and delete every duplicate URL, leaving just one for possible review.

Next, if I spot a submission with a proper title and description, I grab that first, check the site for accuracy, and list it.

If I see a submission with the title and description stuffed with keywords (as you might do when submitting to a search engine), or the description is full of sales hype (as you would write a newspaper ad), I'll ignore until last, or I may just let it sit there and move onto another category.

Why? Because if the submitter doesn't care enough to read the submission guidelines and follow them, in order to give the site a fighting chance, why should I care either? I'm not obligated to list it at all.

If I see a submission, and it's obvious the submitter has made an attempt, but, just hasn't done a good job with the title and description, I'll spend the extra time to spruce it up and make it as nice as I can, because they tried.

Next, if I find submissions that have been either deliberately or unintentionally submitted to the wrong category, instead of reviewing sites, I'll move them to where they belong, unreviewed. This takes up a lot of time, and I may not feel like doing anymore work that day.

So, my purpose here, was to give you a real look inside the ODP at what really happens (from my perspective), and to point out that reading and following submission guidelines speeds up the process, and not doing so, slows it way down. Especially when there might be thousands of site suggestions, and only one lonely volunteer editor working by himself, .

In my opinion, giving you this kind of inside look is more productive than arguing with you, .

The editors in here have answered thousands of questions, usually the same type of questions, and in concentrating on answering the question, and especially trying explain why they can't answer certain ones, they may forget or just not feel like being as freindly in tone as they might be, .

I know that 3 of us tried to help one members inquiry, by going to the public side and trying to find any other 'building snowforts sites', , I think that shows that no subject or inquiry is unimportant to us, or that we're much too lofty and arrogant to try to be of help.

We want to help, but, we might not always be able to, .

Now that sort of response IS appreciated.