DMOZ Isn’t Open After All - Page 11

ladydelaluna · #**501** (**permalink**) 07-06-2005, 08:52 AM

Just one more sentence...

Three cheers for ADAMWebDesign!!! :)

ladydelaluna · #**502** (**permalink**) 07-06-2005, 08:52 AM

Just one more sentence...

Three cheers for ADAMWebDesign!!! :)

Izzmo · #**503** (**permalink**) 07-06-2005, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAMWebDesign

Since this thread got my attention (I noticed that cbp has been the last to post), I felt the need to add a few things.

Note: much of this is personal speculation and should not be interpreted as fact. If you choose to do so and tell me I'm wrong in every way, shape or form...well, you're wasting your time.

1) DMOZ is a gigantic resource of information without a real sense of direction or a true standard for categorization and inclusion across the board. Yes, editors do have standards that they have to adhere to. But within those standards, much as with any standards, there is room for interpretation and grey area.

It's in that grey area that we find the discrepancy in quality among sites. Editors act in their own self-interests; they're new to the DMOZ concept and may not allow certain sites that they should (or allow certain ones that they shouldn't); the categories really haven't been brought out to a full level of subcategory as far as they should; old sites litter the directory because existing listings aren't automatically checked; etc. and so on.

cbp, you might want to run this by the other DMOZers: instead of having one editor unilaterally approve/decline a site, have 5 randomly-selected editors do it, and no site gets in unless 4 out of the 5 (have to allow 1 for editors with their own self-interestst) approve. If there are as many editors as you claim for each category, then this shouldn't be a problem.

2) It's a volunteer project. No one gets paid to work as a DMOZ editor, or we'd all be applying to do it. And to those who volunteer (such as cbp), more power to you.

But...as I've mentioned before, volunteer projects hit a glass ceiling. If someone offers me $50 an hour to work on something, yet it cuts into my time contributing something for free, I'm putting $50 an hour into my pocket. And i wouldn't blame anyone that did. As a volunteer project or company grows, the need to hire becomes increasingly apparent.

In DMOZ's case, the need to hire happened about 3 years ago, and they missed the boat. The fact is that for all of the "editors" and "hierarchy", there needs to be some sort of governing full-time paid body watching over it. And with no revenue streams of any variety, that's not gonna happen and DMOZ will basically continue to be the useless site that it is now. Which leads me to point #3.

3) How many of you have used the DMOZ site to try and find something (not the Google Directory, but DMOZ.org itself)? And of those people, how many of you actually found what you wanted without going through hell to get to it? The search engine is completely useless, and it usually takes 7-8 categories, a lot of drilling down, and some circular category navigation a la Yahoo! to find 1 or 2 links in a category of about 50 that may contain the nugget of information or website you want.

For those of you who might be thinking that I'm insane for wanting to look through DMOZ to find info, consider that the site is a general information portal. It's SUPPOSED to be something a user can go to in order to quickly and easily find information and links to useful stuff. That's the concept. What happened to that? And we've got a perfect segué into #4.

4) Suggesting an improvement, or series thereof. How exactly do we do this? There isn't a way to do so on the site.

Were it not for its continued (albeit fading) influence in Google and Co., I personally would have no interest in, or use for, DMOZ. I probably would have forgotten about it by now, as would the rest of you.

The problem is that it does, and in the state it's in, it negatively affects more than just DMOZ itself.

Those are great points you have there. I work with several SEO techs, and they submit all of our clients to DMOZ. Sure, 80% of them probably don't get in it within the first month, and 60%+ probably still haven't since we have submitted them. In my opinion, I don't use DMOZ, at all. I have the google toolbar, and that's all I need. Sometimes I don't even see why Google has a directory because people will just use the Google Search to find the site they are looking for.

Most searchers aren't advanced enough or are just looking for an easy search without having to click everywhere to get to one page, so it's a given that the average searcher won't want to go to DMOZ or Google Directory by clicking everywhere to find 1 or 2 sites that's don't even meet their expectations.

I've done some searches, and you can find exactly the same results for what your looking for by simply putting in the same phrase in Google search than what you would do with DMOZ or Google Directory or any other directory.

It's that simple, Google it and be done with it.

isharli · #**504** (**permalink**) 07-09-2005, 09:16 AM

I am a new DMOZ editor for a small, obscure category. I am trying to do the right thing in my category and typically respond to new submissions within a day or so. Surprisingly, the oversight on this small category is intense. My last edit was rejected because I failed to capitalize a word. Also, I have been restricted from assuming new categories, so there is very little to do. Perhaps DMOZ is responding to some of the compliants?

fctoma · #**505** (**permalink**) 07-11-2005, 06:50 PM

There is tons of talk regarding the good, bad, and ugly side of DMOZ. I rarely hear good. My experience in the last 7 years of SEO; they WERE great when starting out... the ENDED as a joke.

What engines worth anything use DMOZ?

They are a dying breed, glad to see, now lets move on...

cbp · #**506** (**permalink**) 07-11-2005, 07:08 PM

Quote:

What engines worth anything use DMOZ?

Google, AOL.

CBP

ADAM Web Design · #**507** (**permalink**) 07-11-2005, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbp

Quote:

What engines worth anything use DMOZ?

Google, AOL.

CBP

I think he said search engines worth anything. AOL clearly doesn't belong on that list. :P

Seriously, were it not for the association DMOZ has with SEs, the directory would be almost completely worthless.

frontman · #**508** (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 03:31 PM

We requested help with our listing 5 months ago....nothing happend..then when we just replied to the initial response as to why nothing was showing up they told us to check back in 6 months for the date of the reply.....well..we are at 5 months and 16 days and counting....the directory is great ..if you can ever get listed on it...

cbp · #**509** (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 07:29 PM

Quote:

told us to check back in 6 months for the date of the reply.....well..we are at 5 months and 16 days and counting

Status checks are no longer done at resource zone.

If you are talking about the site in your signature, resubmitting is not a good idea.

CBP

ADAM Web Design · #**510** (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 08:36 PM

Since I know there is someone, somewhere out there who would want to know the answer to this question and probably not have the guts to ask it, I'll do it (and mostly because I'm curious):

Where would site status checks be done?

cbp · #**511** (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Where would site status checks be done?

They can't be done.

CBP

flood6 · #**512** (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAMWebDesign

Seriously, were it not for the association DMOZ has with SEs, the directory would be almost completely worthless.

To whom? I have no idea how many unique visitors DMOZ gets in a day, but it must be huge. I'm willing to concede that a large chunk of them are webmasters submitting sites or editors poking around, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that there are is still a significant number of "pure users".

There must be 10 each of the following threads per month here: "MSN SERPs Suck", "Google is full of Spam", "Is Yahoo Dead?". DMOZ provides an alternative method of finding information. I must use Google 15 times per day and DMOZ about once a week for research purposes.

I think there will always be people interested in a human-edited directory. It will always get less use than the #1 SE (whichever that might be at the time), but I think some form of the ODP will remain long after Google has gone the way of AltaVista.

ADAM Web Design · #**513** (**permalink**) 07-17-2005, 01:14 AM

To whom? Pretty well everyone, if the direct SE implications that DMOZ listings have are removed.

You've made some good points, but the two that you've omitted are the two that are most important:

1) The reason that there are relatively few threads that discuss DMOZ and where it's going (compared to the SERPs) is that many of the threads that would normally be used for this purpose are consolidated into this one gigantic one.

2) If you use Google 15 times per day and DMOZ once per week for research, that means you use Google 105 times for every time you use DMOZ. Even though DMOZ is a human-edited directory, and therefore would have a lot less "content" to draw from than Google, it still has just as many of the problems Google faces, and then some. (editors with their own agendas--many of those SEO-types, spam, dead links, irrelevant content, a site search that I don't think has ever worked, etc.)

In other words, by your own statement you've inadvertently agreed with me the tool is marginally useful at best. Even if you exaggerated your Google figure and it's only say 5-10 per day vs. DMOZ being used once per week, then it's not as useful.

I can accept not using DMOZ as much since it doesn't have the "volume of content" that Google does, but not that much given its size as a directory and its direct tie to Google (it's still the "Google Directory".)

Note: my comments about DMOZ being marginally useful at best aren't just restricted to the site itself, and I don't have any personal agenda against anyone who volunteers for the project (more power to them for giving up their time and all that). The weaknesses DMOZ has as a directory site are also generally the same as those facing other directory sites (human editing delay factor, less submissions due to increased information required, category structure can be quite difficult if the directory grows to a significant size, lack of guys like cbp who will generally give you a tough but straight answer).

Something for everyone to think about: do you visit a directory site outside of DMOZ or Yahoo! (which really doesn't count because it's a hybrid) for the sole purpose of research (no online marketing implications whatsoever) more than once per week? I would be willing to best dollars to doughnuts, as you put it, that the majority of us would say "no" to this question.

I would be in that majority; in fact, I can't even think of a directory site that I've visited in the past year without an "online marketing reason to do so".

cbp · #**514** (**permalink**) 07-17-2005, 01:29 AM

As an editor I am biased, but like flood6 I do use it , probably as I am familiar with it. But use Google much more often.

I use it for some specific searches - eg medical --- search Google for <condition> - you often mostly get sites trying to sell you the drug to treat it. Browse DMOZ and you get all the good info sites about the condition. The mesothelioma case studies are a perfect example - none of the spammy lawyer sites will ever get into DMOZ (...funny how the make it into all the '2nd level' directories)

The last time I checked one of my sites, about 0.1% of that sites traffic came from DMOZ - could be as high as 0.5% if include Google directory and other DMOZ clones (it was a bit hard to work out) - that represented about 150 unique visitor a week to that site --- BUT, they were easily the highest converting (way better than Google) ..... people are welcome to continue to believe DMOZ is not used .... I am happy to take the sales that come from that source.

CBP

flood6 · #**515** (**permalink**) 07-17-2005, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAMWebDesign

1) The reason that there are relatively few threads that discuss DMOZ and where it's going (compared to the SERPs) is that many of the threads that would normally be used for this purpose are consolidated into this one gigantic one.

2) If you use Google 15 times per day and DMOZ once per week for research, that means you use Google 105 times for every time you use DMOZ. Even though DMOZ is a human-edited directory, and therefore would have a lot less "content" to draw from than Google, it still has just as many of the problems Google faces, and then some. (editors with their own agendas--many of those SEO-types, spam, dead links, irrelevant content, a site search that I don't think has ever worked, etc.)

In other words, by your own statement you've inadvertently agreed with me the tool is marginally useful at best. Even if you exaggerated your Google figure and it's only say 5-10 per day vs. DMOZ being used once per week, then it's not as useful.

No, I do agree that I find it much less useful than Google. I hadn't thought about it that way, but using Google 105 times more often than DMOZ sounds about right. However, I often find myself turning to DMOZ because Google, Yahoo, Wikipedia, and whatever else failed to produce the kind, volume, or variety of information I was looking for. Because I could not find this information by other (more common) means it makes my ability to find it on DMOZ that much more significant.

Again, I will totally agree that the number of people who care about DMOZ will shrink by nothing less than 50% the day it has less of an impact (real or perceived) on SEO. I'd actually welcome that day because it will mean less spam and abuse pushed into the directory (either from within or otherwise) and the ODP can go back to being what it was designed to be: a resource to categorize information.

And I certainly didn't mean to suggest that because there may be fewer "DMOZ Sucks" threads here that DMOZ is perfect or better than MSN, G, or Y, I just meant to say that there are plenty of people who are at least sometimes unsatisfied with them and having "something to fall back on" when they fail is useful.

I visit DMOZ much more often than once a week, but the "once" I mentioned was an estimate of how often I do it just to find information on a topic I was otherwise unable to find elsewhere. That said, I think I'd have to agree that my weekly visit for research purposes is more often than most "advanced web users" and much more often than the "average" user (grandmothers, soccer moms, etc.).

I think we agree for the most part, the main issue being how valuable DMOZ would be if it played less of a role in SEO or other online promotion (again either real or perceived).

frontman · #**516** (**permalink**) 07-17-2005, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbp

Quote:

told us to check back in 6 months for the date of the reply.....well..we are at 5 months and 16 days and counting

Status checks are no longer done at resource zone.

If you are talking about the site in your signature, resubmitting is not a good idea.

CBP

Yes..I am talking about our site in the signature...before I got your response I went and read about how to check on it again only to find out that this is no longer avail as of May..nice..come back in six months and now we are closed. Would be nice to either allow up to check on some type of link (I am sure on of the editors could create a link that allowed this) or make it easier for more people to be come an editor and help out....to me this looks like supply and demand....everything I have read states that the supply of editors is low and the demand for listings is high....make it easier to become an editor and still have rules..clean up the massive log of sites that would like to be listed.....can you imagine if they charged a fee...wow...that would be huge..even a small processing fee...............we just want to be listed and felt like we followed the rules as requested...then when we go back we find out that they changed the rules and 6 months of waiting for a status was worthless because now we can not find out a status...just upsetting...

cbp · #**517** (**permalink**) 07-17-2005, 11:40 AM

It has has been stated numerous times in this thread, DMOZ is not a listing service for webmasters. Processing submissions is not a priority for editors. Eevrything you are asking for is based on the assumption that DMOZ is something that its not. Other directories provide listing services (these concepts have been gone over ad nauseum in this and other threads)

How is knowing the status going to change things? What will you do differently if you are listed? What will you do differently if you are still waiting to be listed? What will you do differently if you are rejected? Can you see what a waste of resources status checks are for everyone and too many become obsessed about them.

Your site was waiting when you originally asked, not being able to ask at six months is not going to change anything.

The standard advice given for a long time still stands - submit and forget .... don't become obsessed.

100's of new editors are added each month.

Since this thread started, DMOZ has had a net increase in size by almost 500 000 sites!!!!

CBP

frontman · #**518** (**permalink**) 07-17-2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbp

It has has been stated numerous times in this thread, DMOZ is not a listing service for webmasters. Processing submissions is not a priority for editors. Eevrything you are asking fr is based on the assumption that DMOZ is something that its not. Other directoris provide lsting services (these concepts have been gone over ad nauseum in this and other threads)

How is knowing the status going to change things? What will you do differently if you are listed? What will you do differently if you are still waiting to be listed? What will you do differently if you are rejected? Can you see what a waste of resources status checks are and too many become obsessed about them.

Your site was waiting when you originally asked, not being able to ask at six months is not going to change anything.

The standard advice given for a long time still stands - submit and forget .... don't become obsessed.

100's of new editors are added each month.

Since this thread stated, DMOZ has had a net increase in size by almost 500 000 sites!!!!

CBP

CBP -

You are right...and the bottom line is to continue on and not worry about it...sooner or much later..we will get listed in there....thanks for the comments...sometimes it just gets under your skin a little and you need someone to bring you back to reality...

thanks again for the comments...

JAugusto · #**519** (**permalink**) 07-21-2005, 02:21 PM

I 100% agree with bapster. DMOZ is indeed run by kids. It's the biggest joke on the net. I had the same -bad- experience: the editor owned a site similar to mine!

I just simply don't understand at all why an almost $100 billion company relies on that joke.

cbp · #**520** (**permalink**) 07-21-2005, 05:38 PM

Quote:

the editor owned a site similar to mine!

Was the editor removed after you filled out an abuse report or are you just making unsubstantiated allegations?

CBP

JAugusto · #**521** (**permalink**) 07-21-2005, 05:57 PM

Thanks for reminding me. I did indeed made a complain and abuse report and received no response, till today. More than two (2!) years ago!

cbp · #**522** (**permalink**) 07-21-2005, 06:03 PM

Quote:

I did indeed made a complain and abuse report and received no response, till today. More than two (2!) years ago!

So in other words, it was invetigated and was found not to be the case. If your allegations was correct and the editor was doing this, they would have been removed.

BTW
Where did you get this information from:

Quote:

DMOZ is indeed run by kids

Its news to me.

BTW, if you are asking about the site in your signature, do you think it might not be listed becuse you have not followed the guidelines?

CBP

DMC_34 · #**523** (**permalink**) 07-23-2005, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbp

Quote:

Thankfully I think Google is no longer weighing DMOZ inclusion so highly in PR

It never used t.

CBP

CBP is correct. I believe the so called "DMOZ" benefit in Googles eyes is over inflated at best. I think it is dimishing if it ever was there.

DMOZ wants unique content. Some sites may offer the same products hence might not have enough unqiue content to be allowed in DMOZ. Does Google want the same thing? No. Since my site was removed sometime last year my rankings have climbed they have dominated our market place on all 3 SE's.

Simply put DMOZ is a great link to have but in the end sites can dominate the SERP's without it.

Take it from me on this one. I have my own personal issues with DMOZ and some of the arrogance from some editors but it is a fruitless waste of time. Spend that time building links and great content and soon you will see great results without the coveted DMOZ listing.

I only wish Google allowed Directory listings in its Directory without having to be in DMOZ but that is a Google issue not a DMOZ issue.

DMC

Spectur · #**524** (**permalink**) 07-25-2005, 02:58 PM

How can I put it nicely.

DMOZ is crud.. I have tried several time ( different sites) to get listed with no success. DMOZ is runn by a bunch of elitist.. It is like being back in high school and only those in the "Coll" clique can get in..

Just make me sick to think that google uses DMOZ as an indicator of if your site is a Authority site ..

cbp · #**525** (**permalink**) 07-25-2005, 03:01 PM

Quote:

I have tried several time

....which is against the guidelines.

CBP

ADAM Web Design · #**526** (**permalink**) 07-25-2005, 08:03 PM

He may have only tried once for each site. He did say he tried several times with different sites.

Spectur · #**527** (**permalink**) 07-26-2005, 11:12 AM

Adam,

Thanks for point that out.. I should try to be more clear.

I did try once for each site. Never got a reposnse. Never was I told hey you were rejected for X...

DMOZ has become a piece of junk.

IMHO Google need to drop using DMOZ..

Sapphire · #**528** (**permalink**) 07-28-2005, 12:58 PM

I have one site listed in DMOZ. The other I submitted has never been looked at by an editor (cbp told me this a month or so ago), so it's neither listed nor rejected at this point.

The not-listed site is totally kicking the listed site in terms of quality traffic, inbound links, etc.

So maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure why people get so hung up on whether or not they get listed in DMOZ. What you want is quality traffic that converts and so on... DMOZ may help you there, but from my experience it seems a lot of other things may help you a lot more. So I look at a DMOZ listing as dessert, not dinner. A nice little something extra, but not what keeps you going all day long.

kgun · #**529** (**permalink**) 08-02-2005, 09:27 AM

I do not have time to read all the posts now, so my points may already have been answered.

1. Some good points and well written as usual.

2. Yesterday I watched CNN and heard about Craig’s List http://www.craigslist.org/
for the first time. Effective list that gets to the top on newsmedia in USA.

3. Once I had a project for the global Swiss / Swedish company http://www.abb.com/ .
My job was to collect insurance information for the different companies and consolidate it for the Group. The data should be distributed over the intranet in a standardized form. It was not easy to get homogenous reports, and reports without errors. Even SE’s take their time to index sites / pages. The standard for a human edited directory should be stricter than for the SE’s. But with the exponential growth of the internet, less and less should be indexed unless there is an exponential growth in the number of people working for dmoz.

4. What is the difference between a directory and a SE?

This (you need an account with password to read it)
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/29902-103-10.htm
post on Webmasterworld, by a person working for dmoz may tell you something about their policy. You may read the whole discussion there. I think it starts with msg# 1029.

<quote> (Kgun)
Europeforvisitors said it so excellent at this forum may 30, 2005.
"For the most part, human-edited directories like DMOZ and spidered search engines like Google serve entirely different purposes: Directories index sites, and search engines index pages. It's like the difference between a library's directory of the magazines in its collection and The Magazine Index or the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature.
If you're looking for a site about Elbonian travel, you might use a directory. But if you're looking for an article about mud kayaking in Elbonia, you need a search engine like Google. That's why human-edited directories can't be a substitute for spidered search".
</quote>

<quote> (Flicker - dmoz)
You're completely missing the point of what I said, Kgun. I agree with everything EFV said in that post.
</quote>

Make the following search at dmoz: cnn.com

10 000 hits.

5. My experience when I try to find non English language sites and sites outside the US is that overall, they have low pagerank. Is there also a bias towards the language in dmoz?

6. You find a lot of more information about dmoz at Webmasterworld if you look at the posts for:

Flicker and
Hutcheson

Useful tool:
http://www.finderseeker.com/

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

kgun · #**530** (**permalink**) 08-02-2005, 05:12 PM

Excellent site.

Included it two places. Did not check your contact info. That is in any way up to the surfer.

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

kgun · #**531** (**permalink**) 08-03-2005, 10:00 PM

Assumption: CRich has no hidden agenda.

My respect for you have increased. You make this forum professional.

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

leesw · #**532** (**permalink**) 08-15-2005, 02:08 PM

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this site or not, but there is a DMOZ-like site that seems to be handled correctly. I'm hoping it will be seen as valuable, if not more valuable to search engines as DMOZ.

It is http://www.skaffe.com/

I'm an editor there. It's a classy deal. Many of you might want to become editors or submit your site.

ADAM Web Design · #**533** (**permalink**) 08-15-2005, 04:04 PM

Looks Joe Ant-ish. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but the structure and the logic are very Joe Ant-ish.

greeneagle · #**534** (**permalink**) 08-16-2005, 08:47 AM

I guess this thread will never "wear out", maybe it should be moved over to the "Breakroom".

Is there any value left?
Was there ever any outside of prompting the WPW DMOZ Thread Policy?

LOL
Ken

kgun · #**535** (**permalink**) 08-16-2005, 09:29 AM

1. dmoz editors, should like to find the sites on their own.

2. That means, submitting turned off.

PERSONAL view:

Last time I tried this search:

cnn.com, I got 10 000 hits.

Is'nt there a better news archive online than dmoz?

Isn't the primary task to link to sites and not pages? With an exponential growth in internet sites, it should be hard enough to keep up with that evolution.

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

cbp · #**536** (**permalink**) 08-16-2005, 09:32 AM

Quote:

1. dmoz editors, should like to find the sites on their own.

I list more sites that way. Submitted sites are the worse source of valuable new sites.

Quote:

2. That means, submitting turned off.

I have argued that in this thread.

CBP

kgun · #**537** (**permalink**) 08-16-2005, 11:35 AM

Do you use different SE's ?

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

dougadam · #**538** (**permalink**) 08-16-2005, 02:35 PM

Thought provoking comments.

uli · #**539** (**permalink**) 08-17-2005, 08:25 AM

Hi,
i used to have a dmoz-link on my site, because i thougt, this is a good thing in the net.
So I submitted my site. Nothing happended for a long long time (about 9 months), so i resubmitted - nothing happened, so i removed the dmoz-stuff from my site. After another few months i resubmitted again. Then i saw in the logs, that there must have been some editor on my site a few times, but the site never got listed.

cbp · #**540** (**permalink**) 08-17-2005, 09:05 AM

Resubmitting is bad idea. Everytime you do that you just overwrite the previous submission with the new date. If the editor sorts the unreviewed pool by date (most do), you just keep moving your site to the bottom.

What is the URL?

CBP

uli · #**541** (**permalink**) 08-18-2005, 01:57 AM

Hello,

the url is http://www.ulisoft.org

uli

cbp · #**542** (**permalink**) 08-18-2005, 03:05 AM

Be patient. It has not been rejected ;-)

CBP

Legal.SEO · #**543** (**permalink**) 08-18-2005, 05:27 AM

Sorry to interupt this thread, but this is just a thought I've been mulling around for a while.

If re-submitting your site to DMOZ sends it to the back of the queue, isn't it time somebody at DMOZ changed the code, to include two dates, "date of original submission" and "last re-submit date"

cbp · #**544** (**permalink**) 08-18-2005, 05:44 AM

There is no such thing as queue. Sites go into a 'pool' that editors may or may not use as a source of sites when trying to build a category. If an editors decides to use the pool, there are several ways to sort them (date of submission ois one of them)

The coding was deliberatly changed so the old submission was overwritten by the new one because of the spammers. The idea of the two dates is a good one, but would doubt there would be much of a will to change it as processing submissions is not really a priority (there are more productiv ways for edtors to find sites to ad)

CBP

rer3 · #**545** (**permalink**) 08-19-2005, 02:02 PM

I'm in Insurance...I'm waiting now over two YEARS!!!

cbp · #**546** (**permalink**) 08-19-2005, 06:15 PM

>I'm waiting now over two YEARS!!!

If you are talking about the site in your signature, its not the sort of site DMOZ lists.

CBP

ddemarest · #**547** (**permalink**) 08-20-2005, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damarzee

One of my domains, http://www.designingonline.com had a listing in DMOZ, (you can still see a link to it's position in the Google list of linked sites), then one day i noticed it was gone. I submitted several times over the past year and received no reply, nor has the site been added again.

Funny - the same thing happened to me. I was in their index when they first started out, then we disappeared. I resubmitted about a year ago - nothing. I emailed them to inquire what the deal was - no reply. I gave up.

I also applied to volunteer as an editor - nothing. Seems pretty closed to me.

:(