Low Quality Sites

[marshalp]

I submitted my site about 12 months ago to a section that doesn't appear to have an Editor, I've been waiting patiently for my submission to be approved, today I thought I'd take a look through some of the sites within that section and within sections that are similar, I was amazed at what I found.

 

• One site listed 4 times in two sections
  
• Some sites that are under construction
  
• Lots of poor quality sites that should be removed
  

 

I appreciate that some of these sites may have been listed years ago. Some of these sites were in sections that do have an editor, why doesn't that Editor clean up and maintain so that the directory it useful to its users (wait for the Forum Police to jump in now with the ODP is managed by volunteers blah blah blah who work hard blah blah blah!! Its not good enough!!)

 

I'm loosing faith in DMOZ as a good resource for reliable links!

[jimnoble]

Had you thought of becoming part of the solution? You could become an editor too .

[marshalp]

Had you thought of becoming part of the solution? You could become an editor too .

 

I have applied but unfortunately got refused, I may give it another go this weekend.

[pvgool]

[*]One site listed 4 times in two sections

Normaly this is not something we want.

But in some cases it is acceptable

 

[*]Some sites that are under construction

Those should most probably be removed

 

[*]Lots of poor quality sites that should be removed

As quality is not an objective measurement it is not something we judge a site on.

What you might call low quality I might find very good. Or the other way around

 

You can report websites that you think should not be listed, or need some editor attention in the Quality Control section of this forum.