Odp Delusion

[giz]

>> >> Randomly is the only truly fair way to review sites. Why should a site get preferential treatment by us because its owner suggested it to us 2 months before Site B's owner? Why should a suggested site get preferential treatment over a site that hasn't been suggested at all, just because its owner found the ODP? << <<

 

>> Okay... this is the philosophy that I simply do not understand - in fact, it angers me. What about "fairness," or even common sense for that matter. Why would an editor let old submissions languish, while only paying attention to new ones? <<

 

 

 

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE :: So, we have 42 sites submitted a year ago that all appear to come from the same webdesign sweatshop, and they sit there becuse editors are working elsewhere, and then YOUR site gets submitted today.....

 

You are saying that you want me to review the 42 sites that probably aren't listable, and keep yours waiting for a few months - even though by the title and description that you wrote I can clearly see that this site has a good chance of being listed.

 

Maybe NOW you appreciate why RANDOM is best. It does not force the editor to review stuff that they don't want to touch when there is obviously something more valuable to be done in this, or in some other, category.

 

We let all 8000 editors set their own priorities, and the directory gains many thousands of listings per week: no-one could tell you even 10 minutes in advance where, and what, those would be.

 

The directory grows all the time, there is a report someplace here that shows that growth, and there are many things to be done than just listing sites all of which are volunteer contributions to the directory, its content, and its workings.

[joy]

"Yes, it definitely can take a long time for a site to get listed." Thank you Motsa. And others who have touched on this.

 

It really isn't often that there is a non-defensive reply about the waiting time. I could not see how it could be improved either. More important to me personally is that odpers stop trying to find reasons that blame the submitters. Yes, it takes a long time. (unless you're incredibly lucky!!!).

 

joy

[fathom]

More important to me personally is that odpers stop trying to find reasons that blame the submitters.

 

This rather "bites" - as it implies that editors start threads to blame submitters - and I don't believe it ever occurs that way.

[hutcheson]

Don't think of ALL submitters as "the" submitters -- just one population. That way lies prejudice, resentment, genocide. Some submitters provide us help: dozens of new sites are found daily with their help. Other submitters are lying pond scum. It is the lying pond scum that make it difficult for surfers to find authoritative content, for businesses to promote their genuine websites, for helpful folk (whether editors or submitters) to build directories.