hutcheson - 11:51 pm on Apr 6, 2007 (gmt 0)

>There are at least two other categories that would be a good fit for my site, so I'll probably submit to them just in case the stars align for either of them.

Highly disrecommended: unless one category is a geographic locality and the other is a topical focus (and that only if a site has both global relevance and specific local interest -- such as a symphony orchestra, or a storefront that also does mail order.)

>I guess you can't win it unless you're in it.

I'm no expert, since I'm just not in that game. But I don't think this is true (either way, it's not relevant for us editors.) Lots of people in this forum claim to have been successful in Google (and financially) without an ODP listing. Check out the Google (and other search engine) forums here.

You probably do better to think of Google and the ODP as independent issues. Yes, our underlying goals are similar, and ideally we'd feature many of the same sites. And yes, there is a (small) positive feedback: an ODP listing boosts Google rank; a good Google search result increases the chances of an ODP listing.) But our approaches are so different that you can't constructively target both with the same gun.

>My site is for a legitimate business in a rather mundane sector. It seems business is under-represented in the DMOZ (only 252,283 listings). My primary sector has only 124 listings but could easily have 2,000.

My impression would be similar. I've seen the difference in local categories, where the ODP has several times the number of charitable/educational/religious/hobby organizations that Yahoo does, but the ratio is reversed for businesses. So, yes, I suspect the volunteer editors tend to focus more on voluntary-type subjects. (I know I do.)