Forum Moderators: open
The problem seems to be that the editor of my category is a listed competitor. The editor name is very similar and the comments in the profile seem to point to that end.
All along, we have respectfully been patient and every 2 months or so would email for any reply or comment.
We have now made it to first page Yahoo results in a very competitive field. This is soooo frustrating to be held back from the top 10 now becuase of apparent exclusion for terrible reasons.
My company is in the Better Business Bureau, we get tons of traffic, we provide information and have service awards from Yahoo.
Please will someone let me know if there really is a way to reach a person and have a reply from DMOZ/ODP.
7 months is ridiculous to have waited. We know that we aren't being delayed by the slowness of listings being added because newly registered domains that just were created in November are already listed in our category.
Any help would be appreciated greatly...sorry so long winded--this has been very frustrating and has hurt our search engine climb.
Sincerely,
Tommy
[edited by: Laisha at 2:06 pm (utc) on Feb. 9, 2003]
[edit reason] Removed company name and sig. [/edit]
As it happens there is an open thread on a publicly viewable authorative resource on this very [subject [resource-zone.com]].
The double-standard I found is upsetting and reaffirms my belief as to why I wasn't listed.
One way to check an editors activity level would be to just check the listings for any changes every week or so. Deletions, changes or additions would let you know without being an editor how active someone is tending to the cat.
One question though, my site begins with a '1' and they have me way down in the listings alphabetized using the first 'letter' in the URL.
I thought and I do see in other cats that numbers come before letters...
Is this right?
You're listed and you are still complaining? Dang!
>> One way to check an editors activity level would be to just check the listings for any changes every week or so. Deletions, changes or additions would let you know without being an editor how active someone is tending to the cat. <<
Hmm. Some editors have a huge catspace to edit, so may infrequently edit some areas under their control. Many areas are actively edited by someone higher in the tree, so a category seemingly without an editor might still be tended. In an area with a named editor, it is possible that most of the work is actually being done by a higher editor. Looking at the public side tells you when that area was last updated, but gives no clue as to how much was done or by who.
All information on the editor's side is private and confidential.
[edited by: g1smd at 9:50 pm (utc) on Feb. 23, 2003]
Trust me, I am happy after all this wait in the dark.
I asked about whether such data was available to make such statistics possible, and was told no. I admit this is just intuition, backed up only by guessing from looking at the raw number of greens. One problem with such an average number is that in some areas of the ODP greens never last more than a few weeks, while others are backlogged over 2 years. Thus, the cat you submit to is more relevant than the ODP average.
There is no double standard, just different levels of commitment. Prior to you being an editor tommyleef, by definition, you had "none". Some other editor may have edited every three months or so. Now with you as an editor you may be far more active than the three-month dude.
My site submission had been called 'spam' and dupe' and 'wrong cat' and simply deleted. A good editor will move the submission to the proper cat and not just delete. The same editor had no problem helping other submissions by moving them to the right cat. In reality I won on all fronts and that let's me know I was right all along.
The duplicate listings of my competition the editor had allowed were both removed. My site was rightfully added and the comments in the editing records show I was treated differently for some reason.
All in all this was an experience that only taught me to not put others through the frustration I went through.
Had I simply submitted and let it keep going on and on I'd never be listed. In fact, my site was deleted days after each submission. None of the deleting reasons were valid ones. I would be waiting and waiting not knowing that I am no longer even in unreviewed.
This wasn't all about the greed of wanting myself in the directory. It was about finding unfairness and doing something about it. Not just for me, but for any submission I see being treated the same way now and in the future.
Bottom line is I am in and the abuses were ousted and it took higher editors to correct the situation. I am thankful to the ODP for it's willingness to examine cats and editor notes and correct mistakes.
The ODP system of checks and balances worked in the end for me and I hope it works for all deserving submissions.
Please note that ODP editing logs are confidential and not mentioned outside of internal ODP fora, or e-mails with other editors.
And, consider the possibility that all of this can be explained by less than splendid editing. "Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity" - Hanlon's Razor.
Some editors are just overzealous to delete things. Or, have there own rules for approval that are less than optimal. In this case, I consider this quite possible.
Good to hear that you are able to get into DMOZ both listing and as a editor.
I applied to be an editor too but was rejected with no comments from the reviewer (probably the same chap who reject my site in the first place).
I am trying to make a last attempt to write to the editor one level up regarding not being able to get listed. If I am still unable to get even a reply, I will probably give up. It a *d* PR2 listing, whats the big deal if I don't get listed anyway.
Also, new listings are popping up in the cat I submit.
sigh..
kwngian
"Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity" - Hanlon's Razor.
Personally I prefer the original Occam's Razor
Occam's Razor (principle of parsimony)
Principle that one should not multiply entities unnecessarily, or make further assumptions than are needed, and in general that one should pursue the simplest hypothesis.
Perhaps the simplest hypothesis in this case is malice :o
I applied to be an editor too but was rejected with no comments from the reviewer (probably the same chap who reject my site in the first place).
No, I do not think there is a conspiricy in this case.
Your application will have been rejected by a meta, and by and large metas do not have a lot of spare time editing (go on, any meta deny that ;) )
A good submitter won't randomly submit sites all over the place.
The problem is many submitters are kept in the dark.
If an editor doesn't take the time to move the URL to the right cat--they should let the person know to which cat to apply.
Communication is a beautiful thing and helps people make the best decisions.
>Perhaps the simplest hypothesis in this case is malice :o
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein
The hypothesis that something is due to stupidity is a simple and reasonable hypothesis. ;)
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert EinsteinThe hypothesis that something is due to stupidity is a simple and reasonable hypothesis.
It gives me great pleasure indeed to see the stubbornness of an incorrigible nonconformist warmly acclaimed
--Albert Einstein
;)
