You have lost the point haven't you? I did not say the easiest way to SUBMIT, I said the easiest way to GET LISTED. There is a HUGE difference. An auto-poster for my blog would certainly be the EASIEST way to post entries...just as an auto-lister for a directory is the easiest way to populate categories.
But auto posting to ODP is not allowed, I suspect not to your blog either, to be able to do so I have described what one has to do and its easier just to submit, the op was after all talking about one site, perhaps you lost that in your keeness to denegrate the directory. Also youy are not working hard enough, you bore tha pants off us with your same twisted spam, time after time after time and you have not looked for other mass entry sites yet, at least do your homework.
Sorry for not looking for the other auto-listed sites. maybe you could help us out and mention them yourself? Though honestly, lets jump one hurtle at a time and take care of these shall we? It IS allowed if you can get help from staff, the proof would be in the site I keep going on and on and on about... ever consider the fact I'd stop going on & on about it after it's taken care off? I stopped going on & on about the dead CNN links once they were looked at didn't I? OH never mind, I forgot... you were one of the people that claimed I didn't know what I was talking about then as well... even though I backed up my claims with links to the categories and the dead pages in question and the fact that they were removed. But then, you were never one to bother with actual facts were you? Though, you are correct, auto-listing is NOT allowed... but then, thats precisely the reason I keep bringing the auto-listed sites up. They were auto-listed, they do not fit the guidelines for unique content, and they are still there....
So? What on earth does that have to do with you, or me, or anyone at all? There are a great many areas of the directory that would benefit from time spent by volunteers, and no doubt one day that time will be spent. Until then, by all means report problems once if you notice them, but pointing again and again and again and again to the same problem is a complete waste of time. All editors are volunteers, so jumping up and down and demanding that they do something that you think is important simply will not work. Trust me on this.
But if he had stayed the course as an editor, done some work other than list his own site and applied for categories he could have done the work himself. We have instructions to remove ANY site that we do not feel fills our guidelines and you know that includes the one Q keeps bleating about. Sorry Q, if they upset you sooooo much you should not have had a spat and thrown in the towel.
Yes indeed. This sort of quality control is just one of many activities that volunteers can choose to do, so I was reminding Q that it will get done when it gets done, and not according to some timeframe set by him.
Do you mean you have been trying to suggest a site, do you mean that you have been suggesting the same site over the last 6 months (offering a suggestion more than once breaks our guidelines), or did you mean that you have been applying to become an editor? Please tell us if you have not managed to suggest the site, if you have suggested already, once is enough, it may take from a few days to a few years for a site meeting guidelines to be reviewed and listed, we are not a listing service. We don't do site checks, so if you have suggested the site, that's it, go and promote the site elsewhere you can do nothing more to help it in ODP (short of becoming an editor). If you have been requesting to be an editor then you must have been given some feedback, if you have tried to become an editor and heard nothing, then please tell us.
The fact that they were auto-listed means they were the EASY to add when compared to manual listings. Just as any auto-adding is done on any other site. That is all I am pointing out in this thread. What on earth does it have to do with anyone at all? Not much, though it is a mark against a HUMAN edited directory...but that is not the point I was trying to make in this thread. The original poster wanted to know the easiest way into the ODP, and I simply said the EASIEST way to be auto-added. I didn't say HE could be auto-added, but I suppose he could be if he contacted staff (its worked before after all). Its NOT about me, it's not about the sites I added, my edit count, or any thing other then the easiest way to be listed. I wish certain members here could grasp that concept, and maybe then threads here could be about the topic of the threads rather then about me.
We would n't want to dent your ego by doing any such thing. The op was asking about the easiest way to get listed and it is clear that you know very well indeed that auto-listing was not a possiblity, but yoiu raised it as such. As usual, twisting any thing especiallyu this old chestnut that frankly only you wants to dregde up and up and up. But the sites are human edited, as I said we can remove or otherwise, that's human editing. edit to add, Q, did you not notice on your long residence as an editor that button which allows any of us to mass load sites?
It would not dent my ego one tiny bit... so go on, give your proof. And I guess you are correct, it IS a human edited directory, the TOPIX pages were all listed manually. I was mistaken... thank you for correcting me. Now I have new fodder. There are over 10K deep links to a site that are listed as an affiliated page of an editor none of which fit within the guidelines, and they were ALL added by fellow editors. That make ya feel better?
I see once again you would rather talk about me then the topic at hand. Especially as you've completely neglected my past post and are backtracking to something you seemingly have already covered. So again, if you can't attack the post, why attack the poster?
Your posts sound more and more like the baby that just keep crying me me me me. Get over yourself and grow up, are you spending too much time with babies?
The DMOZ process is interesting. I applied five years ago, when my site was new and quite small. It had a limited amount of good-quality content. I was immediately accepted to DMOZ. By contrast, I've submitted my site numerous times to Yahoo Directory's free option for noncommercial sites. It has never been accepted, even though the website is by now very well-established, totally nonprofit, and receiving 75K unique visitors a month. ??????
Is there another way of finding out whether your site has been accepted? I've been trying for quite some time now, and there is no response at all. Do I keep submitting or is there another way to do it?
I've tried listing my blog like 3 times there and I even made sure it was in the exact category. Declined all 3 times
Keep submitting and you will overwrite the earlier submission and that could make it wait longer. Submiting once is enough, to the right category, and then go and promote your site elsewhere, there is nothing more you can do at DMOZ, it will wait until an editor reviews it and if it complies with guidelines it will be listed, if not it will be rejected. Come back and look it up in the directory every few months and one day you might get a surprise. I would be interested to know how you found out it had been declined, we don't do site checks and we don't send out emails saying we have accepted OR declined a site. The chances are that your site waits being reviewed by an editor, if it's one like me, who works through a submissions list in date order then you will have put your site to the bottom of the list 3 times because each submission will overwrite the previous one and take the latest date for submission. Once is enough, it does not get lost. Then go promote your site elsewhere there is nothing more that you can do. If you want to understand why that is read up some of the threads on here, we have said dozens of times how the directory works and that it is not a listing service.