Forum Moderators: open
I have found two categories that it fits well into.
The category that I would prefer to submit it to, has no editor (though the category above it has an editor). The second choice category has an editor.
What I would like to do, is submit the site to the preferred category. If it doesn't get reviewed in a couple of weeks, I would email the editor of the category above. If it doesn't get in after a reasonable period of time, then I want to assume I am being ignored or have been declined and I would then like to resubmit to my second choice category.
Am I risking getting this submission "stuck" in the queue of the preferred category by submitting to the preferred category (which has no editor)? If I take the course of action above, will the editor of the second choice category review the submission? Or will he not review it if it is sitting unreviewed in the queue for another category?
So if you are submitting to category A/B/C/D of which there is no editor, you may contact the editor of A/B/C. Barring that, A/B, and finally A. It will not help you to contact the editor of A/B/C/Z, because the editor of Z does not have access to the listings in D.
I actually am familiar with the escalation process at ODP, which is why I asked the question the way I did. My own site has been stuck in limbo for over a year at ODP. I have been emailing a lot of editors, all up the line, and have been getting no response. Personally, I am still being patient. But for my client, I don't want to play this long waiting game if I can avoid it.
So my question stands. If I choose to give up on a category, and I wish to resubmit to a different category, can I do that? Or have I tainted my submission and it stays stuck in the first category's queue?
And it may even be (for all I know) that the editor in the category you preferred has been shipping your submittals over to the other (or yet another) category, where he doesn't have editing rights.
In my opinion [and choster may differ here], when the guidelines say "submit again after 6 weeks if the site has not been listed", they do NOT mean "submit again, but it must be exactly the same way!". You are allowed to learn another couple of decimal places from Dewey in the meantime, and you could use your backup submittal to go directly to another category that seemed to you "almost as appropriate."
This doesn't mean you get two listings. Either, or both, submittals may be deleted or moved. (And it doesn't mean submit somewhere else every day until the site gets listed, Mr. Hormel! But you already knew that, I gather.)
Maybe it's worth understanding what happens in the ODP editing process for a visitor submitted entry..
The request goes into the relevant category for review (in ODP parlance this is a "green"). It's worth knowing that sites are not "queued" - i.e. it's not the oldest submission that gets reviewed first, but the order tends to favour newer submissions over older. In other words, if the cat (category) is being actively edited, you'll likely be looked at in a few days. As I said, some entries can literally sit there for years without being reviewed.
When an editor visits your site you will get a referal from [dmoz.org...] in your tracking. This is an important thing to look for as it may be the only indication you get that your site has been reviewed.
The editor's options are then:
Choster is absolutely right about the editor escalation process. It's rare to get a reply from an editor, but keep an eye on the [dmoz.org...] referral which is the tell-tale clue that you have been reviewed.
That's quite a long way to say that entries are rarely ignored, more usually that they haven't been looked at. If you "ignore" a site it will remain as a "green" until someone publishes or deletes it.
Having said that, I think Dynamoo has a fair understanding of what goes on with the editors, though I've seen a lot of things that he doesn't go into. For example, if your site has affiliate links, even one affiliate link, you stand a very good chance of never getting listed. If there's an editor that has a grudge against you, you'll never get your site listed. The real problem is that you just never know (unless you can get an editor to look at the notes connected to your site and tell you) why your site is not getting listed.
Thanks hutcheson, your advice makes a lot of sense. ODP is very large. Sometimes a site is dead on for a category, and sometimes it could fit well under a number of different categories. Hence it is a bit of a challenge to choose the "most correct" one. So I am going to treat the DMOZ system as being forgiving. If a submission sits "unreviewed" for weeks, months, or years, why shouldn't I submit to another "close fit" category? It only makes sense.
Dynamoo & petertdavis, thanks for your insight. Very helpful.
One other question - If an editor does review it, and decide that it is not a fit for a category, is that a black mark against it? Doesn't seem like it would be from everyone's previous comments.
-egomaniac
We don't demand perfection from people who (from our point of view) are trying to help us by bringing overlooked sites to our attention.
One or maybe two wrong but "plausible" mis-submittals should not IMO be considered a black mark (and I believe generally wouldn't be.) We tell editors to just move it to a better category. [Now, there's no guarantee that that happens, and I'd say in at least one out of 500 submittals it _doesn't_ happen (based on resubmittals that I've reviewed). That's one reason the "resubmit after 6 weeks" suggestion is there.)
I would expect SEO professionals (or anyone else submitting a lot of sites) to make some attempt to understand the taxonomy -- dumping unsorted sites is not particularly helpful (or for that matter professional to their clients -- it adds obstacles and delays to the process of listing their site.
Actually, it's not a black mark, it's a red tag. You can get it for something as simple as you had some affiliate links on your site.
Black mark, no becuase other editors, can't see your submissions needing editing in other cats, unless you submit, to very similar area's that one editor looks after, then he may get annoyed, but will usually delete, the most inappropraite for the cat, and list the other.
If you are the Greater Des Moines Christopher Hewitt Fan Club, with information about your meetings and events, a biography of the man, a discussion forum, a photo gallery, essays about the cultural significance of Mr. Belvedere and its impact on trans-Atlantic relations, then the site will probably be worth listing without regard to the affiliate links for his latest books on the Israeli-Palestinian crisis or do-it-yourself refurbishing of a swimming pool deck or whatever.
Most sites will fall somewhere in between. That is why human editors look at the sites-- if the ODP founders had some sort of grudge against CDNow or FTD or Travelnow, they would have written software that automatically rejects submissions with any such links. But that is not the intent. Whether and how a site makes money for its author is generally irrelevant, so long as it's legal in California.
But remember that while you or your client's interest may be in making a sale, the editor's interest is in finding what makes your site different from all the hundreds of others. If you hide that value behind ads or deceptive presentation or meaningless pages extracted straight from Amazon, the editor can't see the value.
And if you think a meta-editor or other senior editor is unfairly discriminating against a clean site or otherwise manipulating the directory's listings, the complaint procedure is the same as with any other editor-- report it.
[edited by: NFFC at 5:42 pm (utc) on Nov. 15, 2002]
[edit reason] No URL's please [/edit]
How much effort do you think a particular meta would have had to do to prove that the content on that site is not original?
Not a lot. As a meta myself, I do it all the time.
Can you point to me where the content on this site originates from?
I sure can. It's a US government website no less.
is it a wise use of a meta's time to pursue sites like this and red tag them?
Absolutely.
Actually, there is not any other site on the net with this exact content. You cannot possibly prove that it is not unique, because it doesn't copy any other specific site.
Yes it does word for word. See above.
The site was red tagged because there is a specific meta who will go out of his way to exclude any site that the author of that particular site submits.
Considering that this specific author has wasted countless man-hours in editor time I say he deserves to the attention he's been getting.
I think this is very abnormal behavior, and very abusive.
In what way? The guidelines ask that sites have unique content. The owner of site in question, heisted content from a US government website, and then adorned it with affiliate links to Amazon.com. He then submitted the site to ODP, knowing full well it was in contravention of the guidelines. Then, after being caught, instead of adding unique content, the owner cries abuse and starts ranting about a meta conspiracy.
I don't see what's wrong with having an Amazon affiliate link on a site. I do understand that there is a great prejudice at the ODP against affiliate links. My opinion on that is that if a site would be added without the affiliate links, it should be added with affiliate links (the reverse obviously being true as well).
I also think the ODP has created huge problems in its inconsistantly judging the value of the content on sites it considers for inclusion in the directory. I understand the part about unique content, but that is only part of the issue. The bigger part of the problem is the inconsistancy. When you say that someone "deserves to the attention he's been getting" you are judging the content of a site differently than if it were a random person's submission. A site should be judged on its own merits, not its author's.
You can continue this public discussion if you wish, but I would more greatly appreciate a response to my response to your sticky mail.
The primary purpose of this forum is to exchange ideas and information about the directories, and so we ask that that you refrain from questions such as "Is my site okay to submit?" or "Why doesn't LookSmart like my site?"
I think we can assume that "Why doesn't ODP like some specific other guy's site" is clarified more completely by the following:
Any specific questions about sites should be taken up through proper ODP channels. We are not the ODP help desk.
Good idea Peter, take it to private mail if someone's being nice enough to be taking their time with it for you, or take it up directly with ODP through channels, either by yourself as an interested party or by the site owner in question.
Getting back to egomaniac's original topic, in principle if a site is submitted to one of two categories equally suitable, if there's no action with submitting to one, I'm wondering if there would be a general guideline for how long to wait to submit to the other, out of courtesy and to not fill up the queues unnecessarily.
I'm wondering because I goofed with a submission, submitting when there were some problems with the site that were overlooked. It's been a couple of months now, I'm wondering if it would be enough time to resubmt to the other category, which is actually a bit better suited.
As a submitter, you aim should be make life as easy for the editor as possible. These are GOOD things to do:
These are BAD things to do (it's a much longer list):
Never, ever forget that the ODP is made up of thousands of voluteer editors who are all individuals and will make individual decisions. Also remember that in some areas editor will actively go out and seek new sites to the directory (so you can get listed without even submitting) and in others there is a backlog of thousands and thousands of sites. In the latter case an editor may spend less than a minute evaluating your site - so plan accordingly. A good site, in the right category, with good content and a good description is ALWAYS going to have an advantage.
