Responding to Submitters

[RatherNotsay]

Dear Editor/Reviewer,

 

The reason everyone feels they should receive a response is because thats the normal professional courtesy of the business world today. Email has enabled communication to be FREE and very simple...basically a couple clicks with your mouse button. Common courtesy if a reviewer does not "accept" a suggested site would be to inform the one who submitted the site. I realize this takes time....probably about 15 seconds with a standard "not accepted" form letter. Maybe if it was clearer on the site submittal form that there is a "indefinite wait time" you would not have so many requests for a status check.

 

Personally, this site is disheartening....to see people on here almost beg to have their site listed. What has the business world become?? To see email response like "the link you sent was not clickable" is a poor excuse for not responding....whether you're a volunteer or not! If you cannot do your job professionally, maybe someone else needs to fill the spot.

 

This site makes me sick.

[nea]

RatherNotsay, it would be helpful (and courteous) if you would take a moment to understand what the ODP is and isn't (see the FAQ for this site, as well as http://dmoz.org/about.html ). It is not a business venture, to start with.

 

You may also want to search for some of the many, many posts where editors have taken pains to explain why responding to submitters is discouraged, as well as why it is not a simple matter of clicking the mouse.

 

Please stop spamming threads with the same message. Thank you.

[bobrat]

This is not the business world, it's a bunch of volunteers trying to work as efficiently as possible. If you hire my consulting services and I write computer programs for you, and you pay me by the hour, I'll be more than happy to send you lots of emails.

 

As said above, do your research and find out what ODP is.

 

It's not a paid service to list sites.

 

It's not even a free service to list sites.

 

And the bottom line reason we don't email about refusals is that it's not a simple email, it's back and forth complaints about not being listed, not 15 seconds of time, followed by threats of legal actions and death threats.

 

[some people won't give up sending email, just as some people won't give up hijacking threads.]

[motsa]

>>What has the business world become??

 

As bobrat points out, we're not the business world.

 

>> If you cannot do your job professionally, maybe someone else needs to fill the spot.

 

A common misconception that someone being an editor is preventing someone else from being an editor. And we've never promised anyone (a) that their site would be listed; (b) that their site would be reviewed within a specific timeframe; or © that we'd answer emails from submitters. So, we're not reneging on contracts or promises.

[hutcheson]

It is distressing to see the level of misunderstanding in these forums sometimes. Regardless of how many times the mission is restated, people still think of the ODP as a listing service for webmasters.

 

If you can help us figure out a way to explain the real mission of the ODP, and stop people from begging us to do something else altogether, it would be a real service, and a really appreciated service.

[Callimachus]

As perhaps a non-sequiter, I wish I had a dollar for every time I didn't receive any response from a business. I might not get rich but I bet I could finance my new workstation.

[Heiduska]

A Modest Proposal

 

It is distressing to see the level of misunderstanding in these forums sometimes. Regardless of how many times the mission is restated, people still think of the ODP as a listing service for webmasters.

 

If you can help us figure out a way to explain the real mission of the ODP, and stop people from begging us to do something else altogether, it would be a real service, and a really appreciated service.

 

People are under these misapprehensions about the ODP because they are expected to submit to the ODP in order to be included on Google. They enter the web arena with a business-world mentality, and are then forced to participate in a non-business-world exercise in idealism. I have worked in collectives and co-ops for the last 13 years, and I can tell you that idealism and business are often opposing forces.

 

The only way to correct the problem you describe is to create a business-modality version of the ODP. This business version would have paid editors; it would charge a small fixed fee for all applications whether or not accepted; it would have bylaws prohibiting the acceptance of external financial influence; it would have a peer-review board to develop and maintain standards worldwide; and the paid editing staff would reasonably be expected to inform applicants of their status. Perhaps the volunteer ODP, as currently run, could be officially maintained as the source for developing standards.

 

I'm actually quite interested in discussing this as a viable option, if any admins, investment angels, or other powers that be are interested in emailing me.

[bobrat]

Because if the idealist attitude of most of the ODP editors, I would suspect that the day paid services were introduced, 80% of them would quit, and ODP would come to a speedy end.

 

There are already plenty of paid directories, the fact that ODP is not, is what makes it unique.

[leer]

... submit to the ODP in order to be included on Google

 

Whats is wrong with http://www.google.com/addurl.html ?

 

These types of suggestions come up all the time however they all seem to have a something in common; most of them are drafted with the submitter/webmaster/company at the forefront.

 

I am not an editor to please a submitter... I am not in the business of wanting to help Joe Bloggs Ltd double their turnover... I am not interested in helping any site improve it's rankings in any search engine. What I am interested in is helping to build and maintain a directory and do that with out financial prejudice.

 

How would charging a fee help the directory and our users? To be honest with all the paid inclusion directories about you would think that submitters would actually appreciate a directory that thrives on only listing quality sites that are not added on an automated basis nor influenced by financial motives.

 

I am proud to be part of the ODP as it is.

[justobserving]

Originally Posted by hutcheson

It is distressing to see the level of misunderstanding in these forums sometimes. Regardless of how many times the mission is restated, people still think of the ODP as a listing service for webmasters.

 

If you can help us figure out a way to explain the real mission of the ODP, and stop people from begging us to do something else altogether, it would be a real service, and a really appreciated service.

 

Follow-up posted by Heiduska

The only way to correct the problem you describe is to create a business-modality version of the ODP.

I disagree with Heiduska's comment. There are a few very simple steps the ODP could (should) take...

 

Explain - during the URL submission process - that the user is submitting only a suggestion for a site to be reviewed. Everything on the submission form pages, including:

"submission policies and instructions" (

http://dmoz.org/add.html

) and

"Submitting Your Site" (

http://dmoz.org/help/submit.html

)

indicates that the submission goes into a queue for timely review.

From: Submitting Your Site

Depending on the activity level of the editors in your area, it may take up to 2 weeks or more for your site to be reviewed.

Based on frequent editor comments in these forums, describing a wait of years rather than weeks, this seems rather absurd and actually made me laugh when I read it. Make it clear that the editors are not combing through submitted URLs looking for sites to add, rather they are adding sites they find on their own, and only occasionally plodding through the (mainly worthless) user suggestions.

 

Even reading through the "apply for editor" pages, along with their associated guideline and help pages, leaves the ODP visitor with the wrong impression. In particular, when one comes across the description of "Greenbuster" editors, it is no surprise that a person (webmaster or not) who submits a site for review becomes frustrated with a lack of response.

 

The other obvious step is to let the submitter know the total number of suggested URLs awaiting review. I can only imagine, based on reading these various forum threads, that there are hundreds of thousands of submitted URLs awaiting the occasional review. Given that piece of information, I suspect the conversations on "when will my site be added" would drop substantially.

 

Essentially, being a bit more upfront and honest with the submitters could go a long way towards relieving the "distress" of misunderstanding.

[bobrat]

Make it clear that the editors are not combing through submitted URLs looking for sites to add, rather they are adding sites they find on their own, and only occasionally plodding through the (mainly worthless) user suggestions.

 

Different editors do different things, I even do different things in different categories. You can't make blanket statements about what editors do.

 

Some of my categories get no suggested sites, they totally depend on my hunting for sites, some I never hunt, I've already got too many sites in the category, I only deal with submissions.

 

mainly worthless - again that's a blanket statement depends on tha category, I have some categories where at least 99% of the suggestions are good and get published. Others where a large number of submissions are spam or wrong category.

 

The other obvious step is to let the submitter know the total number of suggested URLs awaiting review.

 

But why is that important, why does that tell you anything, it's a meaningless figure - unless you know what editor if any is doing any work in that category and what is in that editors mind as far as his plans for editing. And not only that, you have to know what editor might apply for that category tomorrow. http://dummies-guide-to-dmoz.org/position_in_the_queue.htm

 

For example, I planned on cleaning up a small unattended category a few days ago, I ended up getting control of a much bigger area. A few days ago, you might have asked about one of those categories and been told there were hundreds waiting review, next week, that category might be totally cleaned up.

[justobserving]

bobrat - Everything you said pretty much supported my suggestions.

 

Different editors do different things; the number of suggested URLs awaiting review in any particular category is meaningless; some categories get many good submissions, some categories get mostly bad...

 

So, why not provide this information to the ODP visitor at the time he/she suggests a URL?

 

The ODP descriptions of the process of submit and review are at best misguided, at worst intentionally misleading.

 

Submitters (particularly the well-intentioned) get frustrated by the delay, and editors get frustrated by bad submissions and rants and complaints from the submitters.

 

While it will never reach a point of making everyone happy, why not at least take a step in that direction?

[leer]

Once upon a time, not so long ago, we did give an indication along the lines of "Less than 10, about a 100 or you are one of the only few waiting" but giving this information gave people the wrong impression and gave them expectations.

 

If someone was told there was only a few waiting they expected to be listed in a few weeks. Likewise if there was over a few hundred they would not hold their breathe however in reality the result can be the opposite way around.

 

This information proved only to add fuel to the fire as truthfully it means absolutley nothing.

[spectregunner]

The other thing that happens is called human nature.

 

People simply do not read, they jump into action. We can have all the FAQs, all the essays and all the step-by-step guides and they are useless the majority of the time.

 

So if we tell someone they are in a pool with 200 other submissions, I guarantee that the first thing the majority of them do is go resubmit to a different category in the misguided belief that a smaller submission pool equates to a faster review.

 

There is one other thing that is highly relevant.

 

Only the tiniest percentage of submitters ever come here for a status check. Most submit and get on with their lives. Of those that come here, the majoirity get one or two status reports and get on with their lives.

 

A persistent number hang around and try to change things, either through thoughtful dialogue or thoughtless harangues. Either way, drawing conclusions based on the tone or tenor of postings here is a fairly inaccurate indicator.

[hutcheson]

Thinking you have to submit to the ODP to be indexed by Google: That's an ignorance issue: you just have to tell them they were wrong. I don't know where people come up with that, or why they stick to it so firmly; I do know they didn't get it from reading about "submitting your site to Google" AT Google. Maybe we should set up a "quick review program" -- get a free, immediate review for your site! All you have to do is bring us the severed head of a self-proclaimed SERP expert who used to spread this kind of lunacy. We really can't change our ODP mission everytime someone invents another hare-brained notion about the ODP. And -- we try to attribute ignorance where possible, but some of these rumors almost have to be attributed to malice.

 

A "business modality version" of the ODP could be created by anyone. I used to wonder why nobody did it. There was one spectacularly failed attempt -- but from the start it had been nobbled by delusions of technical and social adequacy. And then there was one spectacularly crooked attempt -- that seems to have returned to the cesspool from which it emerged, and its founders departed to jurisdictions beyond convenient extradition.

 

I think Google is using Adwords and Adsense to serve the same market now, and that may have rendered the whole concept unviable. But I'm no business expert.

 

If you want to start something like that, go right ahead. The ODP RDF is available; go for it!

 

Trying to do something like that under the aegis of the ODP (even if staff were interested, which is doubtful) would probably be regarded as a violation of the social contract, which is taken pretty seriously by the editing community.

[bobrat]

People simply do not read, they jump into action.

 

E.g. how many people actually read the Rules for this forum before posting a status request?

 

How many read the FAQ, before asking a question that is answered in the FAQ?

[RatherNotsay]

Hutcheson and ALL other ODP Editors,

 

 

Thinking you have to submit to the ODP to be indexed by Google: That's an ignorance issue: you just have to tell them they were wrong. I don't know where people come up with that, or why they stick to it so firmly; I do know they didn't get it from reading about "submitting your site to Google" AT Google.

 

PLEASE stop "wondering" and "asking" why someone would think they need to submit a suggested site to you to be included in Googles Business Directory!!!

 

Did it ever occur to you that the ODP directory listings and Googles' Business Directory Listings have the exact same path??????

 

Here's an example directory from the ODP:

 

Business: Construction and Maintenance: Materials and Supplies: Wood and Plastics: Heavy Timber Construction: Log Buildings

 

Now...here's the directory from Google:

 

Business > Construction and Maintenance > Materials and Supplies > Wood and Plastics > Heavy Timber Construction > Log Buildings

 

They are the exact same path...exactly!! A coincidence I guess?

 

Furthermore, at the bottom of the Google Business listing page...I find this:

 

Help build the largest human-edited directory on the web.

Submit a Site - Open Directory Project - Become an Editor

 

Another coicidence...I guess.

 

Lastly, if you go to this page:

 

http://www.google.com/dirhelp.html

 

(I hope thats a "clickable" link....I know you won't go there if it's not!)

 

You will find the following question:

 

How can I submit a web page to the Google Directory?

 

The web pages in the Google directory have been selected by thousands of volunteer editors from the Netscape Open Directory Project. If you would like to submit a web page to be included in future versions of the directory, you may submit the web page directly to the Open Directory by following the instructions here.

 

And....YES....if you click the link on the above question...its directs you to the DMOZ Open Directory Project. So...to correct your statement above..."I don't know where people come up with that, or why they stick to it so firmly; I do know they didn't get it from reading about "submitting your site to Google" AT Google."....the answer is YES they did get it at Google, by reading how to submit to Google.

 

PLEASE ONCE AND FOR ALL STOP WONDERING WHY PEOPLE THINK THEY NEED TO BE LISTED WITH THE "ODP" TO BE INCLUDED ON GOOGLE!

 

I hope I made this clear enough for everyone! If the ODP Editors would read the FAQ's on submitting a site to Google (as they want people to do to suggest a site or check the staus of their suggested site), they would know why people think they need to submit their site to them first!!!!!! It's there in black and white.

[brmehlman]

I think you're confusing the Google directory (just a copy of the ODP) with Google search engine results. The latter is what most people are trying to be included in, and too many are under the mistaken impression that the former is the only road to the latter. It's not. There are billions of sites that place well in Google search results without an ODP listing.

 

I'd also like to point out that nothing you wrote gains any credibility from being written in all caps, nor do multiple exclamation points following a sentence add anything to its meaning.

[RatherNotsay]

I'm not confusing the Google Business Directory with Google Search Results.....but I think you're right....a lot of people probably are confusing the two.

 

Does a listing on Google's Business Directory affect the Google Ranking....maybe indirectly...maybe not. There are sites with high rankings that are not listed with the ODP and Google Business Directory....but I do feel there is at least some correlation between the two....thats just my opinion though...could be wrong. Personlly, after my site was listed with the ODP and subsequently on Googles Business Directory....my ranking did improve.

 

Oh yea...Sorry about the cap's in the above quote.

[senox]

Google's Business Directory

I'm quite happy to see that Arts is by far the largest topical category, that Society is still larger than Business, and that Science is not too far behind Shopping. And no, I have absolutely nothing against Business or Shopping, I just don't agree with the 'Business Directory' which is absolutely not what the ODP is about.

[Heiduska]

...nothing you wrote gains any credibility from being written in all caps, nor do multiple exclamation points following a sentence add anything to its meaning.

 

But his comments did in fact validate why I was under the apparent miasapprehension that you have to get through the ODP to get into Google. In fact, the only reason I ended up visiting this resource-zone website was in an attempt to figure out how and why Google had no direct submission process. Yes, now I "get" that they do, but I did not see that on Google's search engine results pages, which is where it made sense (to me) to look.

The extreme huffiness of the volunteer idealists here is inappropriate considering that Google directs applicants straight to the ODP, giving the impression that specific timely results can be expected and even demanded. Yes, you have FAQs, and various messages saying the directory inclusion may take an indefinite period of time (if ever), but the impression has still been left that there is an agency which one is applying to in a business context.

If the idea of a business-modality standard for application is so laughable, then the ODP seriously needs to reconsider allowing Google to link to the ODP for site submissions. Either that, or all applicants should receive an automated email which spells it out in terse text: "Your application to the ODP has been received. This application does not guarantee you ANYTHING. It is not, and should not be considered, an application to any search engine. All you have done is applied to have a team of volunteer librarians attempt to categorize your site. Business owners should not expect that applying to the ODP will provide ANY results whatsoever."

And if you think this should all be obvious already, then why are you inundated with demands?

[Heiduska]

And furthermore,

as a business owner with certain standards, there are products I won't carry. It is my responsibility to let both vendors and customers know at the outset what they will and won't be able to get from my business. It would be folly to turn on a customer who wants Coca-Cola and sneer at them "Of course we don't carry Coke. That's not the purpose of this store!" It is the responsibility of the ODP to disabuse all applicants of the notion that their application will result in a listing. Again, you may think you already communicate this, but the barrage of complainants would indicate otherwise.

[motsa]

If the idea of a business-modality standard for application is so laughable, then the ODP seriously needs to reconsider allowing Google to link to the ODP for site submissions.

Actually, we don't allow them to link to us, we require that they do. It's a requirement for using our data, for anyone.

[ishtar]

Either that, or all applicants should receive an automated email which spells it out in terse text: "Your application to the ODP has been received. This application does not guarantee you ANYTHING. It is not, and should not be considered, an application to any search engine. All you have done is applied to have a team of volunteer librarians attempt to categorize your site. Business owners should not expect that applying to the ODP will provide ANY results whatsoever."

 

How about something along the lines of...

 

-----------------------------------------

 

In exchange for ODP's consideration of the site I am submitting, I agree

• To be bound by the ODP's Terms of Use .
  
• To waive any claim related to the inclusion, placement, exclusion, or removal of this or any other site in the ODP Directory or to the title or description of any site appearing in the ODP Directory; and
  
• To grant Netscape Communications Corporation a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, publish, copy, edit, modify, or create derivative works from my submission.
  

I also acknowledge that Netscape and the ODP have unfettered editorial discretion to determine the structure and content of the

directory and that, because a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time, I may not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. (i.e. "submission" means the title and descriptive information you supply for your site, not the actual website or its contents).

[motsa]

I knew I'd seen that somewhere before.