Why Most DMOZ Submissions Are Rejected - Page 2

jeffnova · 03-13-2008, 07:56 AM

budalata,

Thanks for adding some real data to the discussion. I don't believe I'm hijacking the forum, just expressing my answer to the original post question, and addressing subsequent criticism. If the process was open, would we need someone to post the question "Why Most DMOZ Submissions Are Rejected"? Wouldn't we have data?

When you say...

"Generaly, most of the editors applied for category, where they have interest in, some of them wanting to edit/list their own sites. "

Yes, that is what we generally surmise to be the case. It is interesting that many DMOZ defenders will not concede this truth.

People try in vain to get their site included, find that they can't get it included by submission, so eventually try to become an editor in the category covering their own site. Having gone through that effort, can you honestly say to us that those editors don't have an interest in excluding competitor sites?

budalata · 03-13-2008, 01:29 PM

Hello jeffnova

Back to the topic. No doubt - good post. But - there is one "but".

Almost all the listed advice are reasons one listing to be delayed, not rejected. There are a lot of editors - including me - which have habit to delete immediately site title and description provided. As frederrick pointed

Quote:

1% or less meets with DMOZ submission guidelines

. Thats why I - and part of us - prefer to check the sites without being "influenced" by other description.

Why Most DMOZ Submissions Are Rejected?

1. Lack of content.
2. Lack of content.
3-9: - same -
10. Dont accomplish to our specific Guidelines./mirrors, content mills, MFA, MLM, and so on.

But if submitters follow frederick's advice - their submissions can attracts editors attention

Back to the offtopic

Quote:

It is interesting that many DMOZ defenders will not concede this truth.

Not true. I know tens of editors, and everyone of them will confirm my words about.

Quote:

People try in vain to get their site included, find that they can't get it included by submission

Probably you know why we dont provide status check. If not - 99.95% of the answers will be "still awaiting evaluation"

We need editors. Yes, we do. We stated this in more than 1 000 000 subpages of dmoz.org. And all of the sites using our data must have this tiny "Become an editor" link.

Quote:

so eventually try to become an editor in the category covering their own site

Please, feel free to fill our application form, you will be welcome. It is not so difficult - almost 80 000 persons managed to become an editors

If you can give this project some of your free time, this will be good. If you like our team, or if you find editing for interesting hobby - you can apply for more privs. It depends on you

Regards

Birdie · 03-13-2008, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffnova

It is interesting that many DMOZ defenders will not concede this truth.

Somewhat paradoxical that you talk about truth when I have repeatedly asked you to back up your claims with evidence. You continue to fail to do so. Who is speaking the truth?

jeffnova · 03-14-2008, 02:18 AM

Budalata, thanks for the info and the suggestion that we apply to be an editor. We've been down the submission and editor application trails in the past with no success, and our subsequent investigation and discussions with insiders is what led to the information we shared here.

Birdie,

You still haven't admitted that a DMOZ link has value or that an editor with a site in a given category has an interest in seeing competitor sites excluded. I wonder if you'd admit what budalata stated:

"Generaly, most of the editors applied for category, where they have interest in, some of them wanting to edit/list their own sites. "

jeffnova · 03-14-2008, 03:02 AM

I neglected to address two other points:

Budalata, also, something curious from your last post - you say that the first 9 out of 10 reasons for "Why Most DMOZ Submissions Are Rejected?" is "lack of content". But then you say that "99.95% of the answers will be "still awaiting evaluation" regarding the status of submissions if they were to be posted. Maybe you are putting a very fine point on "rejected" versus "not accepted" (which is my guess as to what the thread originator really wanted to know) but it sounds like you are saying that the reason most DMOZ submissions are not accepted is that they are never reviewed (only 5 out of 10,000 are evaluated by your estimate).

Birdie, I didn't mean to ignore your question about truth. I'm very comfortable that any readers of this thread can tell who is speaking the truth.

budalata · 03-14-2008, 04:02 AM

Hello again,

what I want to point is that there is a big diffrence between rejected and not checked sites.

Main reason for the rejections is the lack of unique and valuable content.
Main reason for the delay is the lack of editors.

I am confuse about your post. You wrote we couple of times. Please, have in mind, that editors accounts are personal.

Quote:

but it sounds like you are saying that the reason most DMOZ submissions are not accepted is that they are never reviewed

Yes, its so

If you spent some time reading this: http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/f...tatus_faq_item and the threads related, you will see that we dont hide the fact about "never reviewed" sites.

Regards

talis · 03-17-2008, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Countless number of submissions is received by DMOZ directory but only perhaps 1% or less meets with DMOZ submission guidelines. Below are some guidelines:

I guess 99% of the rest who submit are total idiots

Quote:

I think you leave out that many submissions are rejected because the editor does not want competitor sites to be listed.

Totally agree

Quote:

I know for a fact I submitted good quality content following their guidelines and still no listings.

That's my point.

budalata · 03-18-2008, 06:16 AM

talis,

I am trying to give "first hand" opinion here, commenting one good thread. There is another forum, where you can "discuss" or share your experience.
I can edit in some 1000 categories. Believe me, its difficult. May be I will never edit in some of them - not because I have competitors there, but because I have limit. I am human...

Yes, its possible your site with quality and valuable content not to be listed. Sorry.
As I said - most of the sites are not rejected, but havent been touched by editor.

talis · 03-18-2008, 06:43 AM

You sound like a legit person working there and I respect that. Your obviously not editing in my catagory. Bottom line for me anyways is that there have only been 19 sites added to my industry catagory in 6 years!!! Most are fly by nights but some (3) are the top players in our industry. Two of those three are retail and do not operate online. I read somewhere above where submitting too much will only hurt. How about once every two years? Is that too much?

I am PO'ed about this and am still working on getting listed. Maybe my editor will decide to retire one day. Can't say I am a repeat of the sites listed. I have been a top player online for several years in my niche even without DMoz but I sure would like to be included. I consider DMOZ the grand poo pa of them all and would love to have that opportunity eventually.

budalata · 03-18-2008, 06:56 AM

Hello,

Quote:

Maybe my editor will decide to retire one day.

You dont have editor, lol

Have you ever think of applying to become an editor? You sounds like a person, knowing his niche.

If you can share some of your free time, and if you mange to be neutral when editing, you will be more than welcome

Regards

talis · 03-18-2008, 07:03 AM

I don't have time but my dad who brought me into the business has recently retired and I think he would love to this on his free time. I will have him sign up when he comes to visit next month. Thanks for the idea.

anonymously · 03-20-2008, 05:36 PM

Remember too, that some editors do not use the suggestions to list sites, they prefer to find the sites themselves.

I can understand people getting frustrated with DMOZ and the seemingly endless wait for some people. But understand the motivation of the editors, it is not to offer a listing service for webmasters, it is to provide categories with sites that have unique content. So in some categories the submissions are good, but in others submissions are pretty well all junk.

Also some categories do get worked more than others, that depends on how any editor feels. I am listed in some categories and only edit there once a year!

I would also underline from that last statement of mine that even when an editor is listed then that does not mean the category has only a short time to wait for a review of submissions. Also to underline what Budalata said about sites not being rejected but awaiting review. We did lose all submissions in the crash around the end of 06, so no submission has waited more than 15 months, but have to say many have waited that long! Before that crash, no sites ever got 'lost' they sat around and around and around, in fact some of us breathed a sigh of relief to have the slate wiped clean.

I have rejected less than 5% of all sites that I have reviewed, probably about 10,000 reviews, so rejection is, in the areas I chose to edit, not very high, but waiting is.

edit to add
Also if editors do not list their competitors that is seen as abusive editing and grounds for dismissal. If you suspect it, make a report and it will be investigated.

Birdie · 03-20-2008, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anonymously

Also if editors do not list their competitors that is seen as abusive editing and grounds for dismissal. If you suspect it, make a report and it will be investigated.

I have asked repeatedly in this thread for jeffnova to come up with the goods on this....notice that he has repeatedly failed to do so?

dman_2007 · 03-21-2008, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budalata

Main reason for the delay is the lack of editors.

You've got to stop saying that, people are not that stupid as you think. The fact is there is no lack of volunteer editors, what lacks is your (application reviewer's / meta editor's) willingness to give them a chance. I'd like to point you to another community powered site which i am sure you already know about : wikipedia.org. I've never seen anyone complain about lack of volunteers at wikipedia.org . And i should add that they're doing pretty well. Also, its not like by rejecting applications and only approving those who you supposedly think are trustworthy enough to be editor, you're maintaining high quality of directory. The directory is full of dead links, redirects, and below par websites and not to mention doesn't list most of the new useful sites.

Also, before you reply to this post take a look at this to see where i am coming from.

budalata · 03-21-2008, 07:32 AM

I dont think people are stupid.

Quote:

The fact is there is no lack of volunteer editors, what lacks is your (application reviewer's / meta editor's) willingness to give them a chance

Oh. Not true. Our metas are doing really their best when estimating new applications. Dont know how to prove you this...wonder if you will believe me.

To be short - when your application was rejected /havent seen it, not enough privs/ - we started a thread dedicated to this problem. Its about small category, good for new editors, but with too many unreviewd sites
Because of your case and some simillar ones few editors received editing permissions.

When you asked about, meta gave you answer that the category is suitable for new editor. But...he missed the number of submissions there - they are too many.

Sorry for this. What I can only suggest you, is to apply again. No joke. Please, apply for Greenbuster there - hope that after gathering some experience, you will receive full rights in this category.

Regards

thebeacon · 03-21-2008, 08:43 AM

Thanks for posting. I have the worst luck with submitting websites to DMOZ.

anonymously · 03-21-2008, 04:55 PM

I don't want to confuse the issue, but I did not think that new editors could apply for greenbusting privs, thought that was just for existing editors to get more experience.

But if I were the OP I would apply for http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/O.../Storage/Free/
that would not have too many sites or submissions.

budalata · 03-22-2008, 12:47 AM

As anonymously said.

Or - just make clear in your application that you were rejected for full rights editor, and that you would like to try like Greenbuster.

sniperhiga · 03-23-2008, 08:23 PM

DMOZ approve only established websites with quality content. A lot of depends from category moderator and if you compare your site with other sites which already listed... you will find the answer.

anonymously · 03-24-2008, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniperhiga

DMOZ approve only established websites with quality content. A lot of depends from category moderator and if you compare your site with other sites which already listed... you will find the answer.

Sorry it is easy to see you are not an editor. I have listed hundreds of new sites. Quality in DMOZ speak = unique content. That's all.

There are times with some sites that one would wait awhile, like forums submitted with three posts on them, but we list new, sites, established sites, no page rank sites (because it does not cut any ice with us), poorly constructed sites, provided they fit our guidelines for the category. ie some shopping sites have to sell on line in certain categories, some have to have a locality to be listed in regional. But all have to have unique content and if they do have that, they will fit somewhere.