>Do I take your response as an indication that no effort will be forthcoming to determine what happened to the other 16 submissions?
Not at all! I trust that the submittal policies make our position clear.
"Your" submittal policies may make it clear, but Google, Yahoo, and Alexa's clearly don't then. If you have an issue with the agencies that use your services (and, I presume, give you something tangible or otherwise in return), giving the first impression that it's their own, I respectfully suggest you take it up with them, not a naieve submitter.
>The extra submittals either have been or will be summarily disposed of as they are found.
It's clear that someone's already summarily disposed of them, isn't it? Thank you. That answers the question about the other 16 (4 apiece through 4 other Online Search Engine services over a 7 month, three week period). One every two months. Spamming, huh? Ok then. Let's be absurd.
>Please, on our behalf, track down the perpetrator who maliciously submitted this site 14 times more than allowed by the ODP submittal policies, and give us a full report on who, why, and what you have done to keep this from happening again.
How about this instead? How about you give me a full report on how this happened after you contact the four search engines and report back to me on how they managed to either mishandle, misroute, or fail to act on the four submssions to each of them (one every two months) over the past 7 months? And how about we take your written accusation that I've been a "malicious perpetrator" to the next level?
>If you can do this to our satisfaction, we won't have to delete the last remaining submittal for "malicious spamming contrary to the submittal policies."
If I can do this to 'your' satisfaction? Forgive me, but I fear I've been belaboring under the mistaken belief that you feel you're performing a service to the internet community at large. You certainly seem to get a lot of mileage out of that very noble sounding mission statement throughout the internet. I was unaware that certain of us have to jump through additional hoops for the amusement of beleagured volunteer editors on power-trips with the power to give a thumbs up or thumbs down to an otherwise valid and well-meaning URL submission contribution simply because they can--or even worse, simply because someone asks what might have gone wrong previously.
Very well. Youve fully educated me on how this level of the submission process operates. Thanks for the very helpful guidance. It's becoming more and more clear to me what's happened to the site submissions through the other search engines.
Since threats seem to be the lingua franca in this wonderfully 'open' and 'community' minded service, so be it. We'll see how threats work in the other direction now.
I don't respond at all well to threats, so by all means follow through on your threat to round-file this one so we can all take this to the next logical step in the process with full and upfront disclosure of intent.
As to the paragraph spacing, 'other thread' comment, etc., please forgive me, I'm a newbie to this forum (and apparently destined to be a never again-bie to this forum if hutchenson has his or her way).
So be it. This exercise has amply answered over 7 months of questions.
Thanks.