What criteria for judgement are editors using?

I am addressing this question to DMOZ editors:
I have had a website since 1998, and it has been through many revisions - expanding and growing in its small way with technology. I have tried to submit the site (and the images of work it contains) through the DMOZ several times - only to be relegated to a low rank directory time and again containing listings that have little in common with my site. Meanwhile, those making the same product as mine, often at poorer quality and greater cost, (claiming to be hand made - in a directory announcing "handmade" but in fact made by computerized machine is one example)are placed not in one directory, but in some cases five or even six directories, creating the impression that they are tho only and the best. If you truely edit these directories and listers are allowed to submit only once, how are some sites obtaining new listings in 2, 3 or even 4 directories simultaneously? (Please note that it is difficult to document these allegations without mentioning the actual sites - which is not allowed)

Businesses are frequently entitled to be listed both in a Topical category (like http://dmoz.org/Shopping , for example) and in a Regional category. Additionally, sites in multiple languages may be entitled to be listed in a category in each of those languages. Occasionally, editors may determine that a site or parts of it are also appropriate for other categories.

If you feel your own site is misplaced, feel free to use the "Update listing" link on the category page where it is listed to request that an editor review its placement.

And please understand that "low rank", well, any rank, is meaningless to us. We're not Google; we don't care about page rank.

only to be relegated to a low rank directory

Click to expand...

There is no such thing.

There are categories and subcategories running many levels deep.

If we left that decision up to webmasters, there would only be one, very full, category -- the topmost one.

Can a website be listed if don't submit it for listing?

Absolutely, editors are encouraged to find and list any eligible sites they find.

Many experienced editors eschew the suggestion pool in favor of locating sworthy sites on their own.

Looking at 25 more templated real estate sites, complete with pictures of their dogs, is certainly not my top priority.

I've been editing for nearly a year and have yet to add (or suggest to another editor) a single site that came to my attention via submission. As spectergunner just posted, I find them myself. It's much more reliable. Most sites in the suggestion pool have already come to my attention through simple Internet searches and by following links on already listed sites.

Hey Sarge

So if I understand you correctly - for the category that you are assigned to edit, you don't even bother to look at the submissions?

I don't doubt that you can't find quality submissions on your own, but there is a good chance that you will miss something that might be very valuable to that category and it will be missed because you don't review those submitted.

I don't know, just my .02.

Cheers

In some 'popular' categories, only 1 out of 100 listing suggestions is a listable website. That's a lot of dross to wade through to find the gem.

On the other hand, perhaps 10-20 items from a Google search page of 100 results is useful. (Getting that good a result takes some skill and experience of course.)

So which method is the most productive? the most efficient?

I accept that we might miss that one gem in the pool of listing suggestions but we aren't trying to list all websites, just enough to satisfy the surfer.

Note 1 All above statistics invented on the spur of the moment to illustrate the point.

Note 2 On the other hand, the listings suggestion pools in many niche or locality categories have a much higher yield - approaching 90% say. Editors are unlikely to ignore these.

Jim, thanks for taking the time to respond. I guess that makes sense. Too bad there are so many bad submissions to sift through.

WebMan2000 said:

Hey Sarge

So if I understand you correctly - for the category that you are assigned to edit, you don't even bother to look at the submissions?

Cheers

Click to expand...

Not at all. But I have managed to find them all before they were ever suggested.

there is a good chance that you will miss something that might be very valuable to that category and it will be missed because you don't review those submitted.

Click to expand...

If a site is a "gem" it is likely to be found through other means besides just submissions. I often find that after doing some of my own hunting, I have found a few sites that were already in unreviewed, but not many. I think some areas of the directory grow faster when editors focus on reviewing sites from a source where 90% end up listed (editor's own searches), rather than 10% (suggestions).

Well, I must admit that I have doubts thinking that an MDOZ editor will start looking out for (let's go for extremes) a builder website in my case or a website that sells washing powder even thou it might be the best website in the world.
However, I still think that you guys are doing a great job, I am running a ..how should I put it..a second website, a non-commercial website with an ideology not close to MDOZ ( did I get the name right? lol( I did now-edit)) but rather more advance. I am paying for the host etc. and I am wasting my spare time to run it. Then I get angry emails, telling me that I am very wrong and called nasty names. So, I admire you guys for doing this for free, as long you don’t get a thrill out of the power that comes with it. Btw the other website ( I did submitted myself ) and it has been listed in the directory in about 1 month or so.

Well considering a site about a builder would most likely be listed in a localitity category, the chances are a little higher that the suggested sites are more useful to an editor.