Bobrat,
We assume you created the best site you could prior to suggesting it.
That's not a very wise assumption, it doesn't mean improvements won't happen in a site over time.
We do not want you tweaking your site to get around our rules.
It's really no different than the system you have now. What's to stop me from submitting a site every 6 mos to different categories until it gets in somewhere?
Some days, I might do no editing, some days I might go through a couple of hundred unreviewed
But this can show a monthly average over time, or something like that, which would indicate whether you are making headway in your category, or drowing fast.
Hutcheson,
Editors are not asked to "keep up with submittals".
How effective is a site with information that's years old and full of dead links?
99% of them don't take a polish any better than a buffalo chip.
Then force a wait time after rejection and don't let them back in. Again, you could just say "hey, we rejected this site 4 months ago, you cannot resubmit until after 8 mos" or whatever time frime you need to keep being flooded with already rejected sites. But, like i said above, telling someone their site has been rejected is better than leading them on and thinking it's going to be submitted. And, apparently, nothing prevents them from submitting their site every 4-6 months into different categories.
You seem to think editors have some way of precisely estimating review time, which we keep secret. We simply do not. There is not one. It is impossible.
Of course you can't know the exact time, but even the lottery will tell me the odds. You can come up with odds, I take it you don't always take sites first come first serve? But you must know how many are submitted sites are reviewed a month on average, and how many submittals you have.
And that doesn't burden anyone with tens of thousands of apparently-random data points that nobody could fit into a coherent pattern, or arcane mathematics that 99% of us simply could not understand. But you're asking for the latter. I don't mind giving it -- but I've been stung before, so I won't this time UNLESS you assure me that you have at least a B.S. minor or B.A. major in mathematics, with coursework including statistics, transfinite numbers, and operations research (understanding of all of which is critical to forming an adequate quantitative model.)
Haha, I dislike math. But I don't believe anyone would need several math degrees to figure out a notification system, you get an email, it tells you what's up, like it or don't, but at least you get some notification.
Perhaps to understand the rate of submission and rate of approval, but doesn't mean it's impossible, or that it can't be done at a faster rate.
Keep building your website, just as if the ODP didn't exist.
Yea, good advice, I really don't know the significance of ODP except that tons of sites use your data, which gives a person automatic backlinks, but not much concern to me. I can understand people's frustration though, at the long waits.
But it's a fundamental disagreement about how things should be run. I didn't expect to come here and say "timeframes" and have everyone say "BRILLIANT!" Just thought I'd mention it, bobrat and hutcheson you guys are actually really nice.
The rest of you editors need some work. Could you at least pretend like you didn't become an editor so you could get your own site listed faster than everyone else's? Heh.
(And PS, guys, it's creepy when you start talking to me in the DP forum about stuff from the DMOZ forum. All 31234 of you 2 post dmoz editors who like going over there to defend dmoz, to you I say : review some sites slackers. =) )
