Has anyone submitted a site in November '12 and been accepted?

Did anyone submitted a domain in DMOZ last month and got his/her acceptance?

 

Not a single one

 

I cant work out if you are crap at telling lies, or you just have a really good sense of humour? Either way........you are obviously wrong. LOL

 

it was a joke, but of course statistically the chances of getting a listing in the same month as a submission is pretty slim.

 

Sorry that you have such a twisted sense of humour that simply gives out incorrect information, often to people who have come here asking for answers.

DMOZ editors consistently post the time scale on here as being from a few days to a few years. I have listed sites a few days old and a few years old.

 

No one may never know... you got one joke, and two editors complaining about said joke.

Which actually leads me to believe that the joke may have a ring of truth to it... but I don't know, I never counted.

 

Correction, we got one very missleading comment which was subsequently claimed to be a joke, but no one seems to be laughing and at least one piece of correct information about how long it can take for any site to be listed.

 

You...still...didn't...answer...the...question.

 

Only a raving lunatic ( and Q) could believe not one site was suggested and added in the same month.

 

You...still...didn't...answer...the...question.

I didn't say I believed that no sites were added, but surely more then one? Maybe a million? There are like a trillion urls on the net, maybe all of them were added? Two people that should have at least a partial clue are doing anything but even guessing at the number. How many posts since the question was asked has anyone given even a guess other then me saying I didn't have a clue...and you call us raving lunatics? Why exactly? Because a question was asked and you make personal attacks and avoid answering? Yeah, and we are the loonies, lol.

so again...

You...still...didn't...answer...the...question.

 

Well then call me a raving lunatic, because I can make the argument using data here, and posted elsewhere that the number of submissions is extremely high and that the number of editors (compared to the number of editors in the DMOZ heyday) is extremely low. I could also use logic quoting countless people who have claimed that they have submitted sites and never been listed or been listed after years of waiting vs. the claims of people who I have heard claim a listing in weeks of submission (slim to none)

Most people would find my argument sound that tens of thousands of submissions are going into the pool / pipeline / mountain and that the average editor is either:

1. Working oldest to newest
2. Grasping randomly
3. Ignoring submissions
4. Not doing anything

and least likely working newest to oldest.

all of this helps my argument and you have no data to support your side except to say that "Only a raving lunatic could believe not one site was suggested and added in the same month."

My response of course is that "Only a raving lunatic could believe that they could get a listing the same month they submitted that listing with DMOZ having hundreds of thousands of listings in their pool of suggested sites considering how members of DMOZ have quoted how editors tend to operate"

You can say "it's not a queue" "It's not first in first out" you can say whatever you like.

The truth is, it has become an insurmountable task akin to emptying the Atlantic ocean with a teaspoon.

It has now become a lottery. Sites are drawn at random for consideration and it is the only directory site on the web to do it this way.

 

This is quite true. We can pull sites from the suggestion pool that catch our notice and we arent compelled to try and edit in any formal order. We can edit in what niche we like, assuming we have permissions and we can edit when we like.

So what if we are the only directory that does it this way? Whats it got to do with you or anyone else?

 

My guess is NO, as there has been two editors that seemingly refuse to answer the question!

 

The answer is 42

Actually, total monthly additions is not a statistic that we keep track of as far as I know.

If you're really keen to know the answer, just take the number of listings at the bottom of the home page and compare it with the previous month's. That will show the total additions less the total removals.

If you just want to know the additions, write a script to compare RDF files. Yes I know that this is a non-trivial task which is why I'm not volunteering to do it.

Now if you'll excuse me, rather than continue this silly pissing match, I have some useful work to do.

 

Thank you.

See guys, it wasnt that hard.

 

Yes it was, as far as I can see Jim actually did not answer the question asked, which was how many people who have submitted in the last month have had their sites listed. So it is not a total number of sites added in a month but the number actually listed that were submitted during that month. Or how many people got a turnround in a month.

As I said earlier and underlined by Jim's comment about stats for sites added in the month not being kept, that figure DMOZ really does not have an interest in.
But as I also said earlier the comments by joeventura are simply scurrilous lies because he and DMOZ just do not know and the only comment that can be made is that of a generic comment saying it can take from a few days to a few years, DMOZ cannot predict and neither can it inform you of the turnround time because it does not keep those stats.

 

and that is why the entire site is an anachronism.

 

No, it's just a hobbyist site, like many others on the net. If you want it to be more, wish it were more, believed that in the past it were more or hope that in the future it will be more....sorry it will not be. If Google made it into something else, then complain to them, if site owners made it into something else complain to them, but all it ever is was and ever shall be is a hobbyist site where sites are collected and collated for fun and hopefully others might want to use such data for searching the net.

And whilst people want to have this great hobby it will continue and plenty of people still do. You have been told our best estimates (estimates because it changes all the time and if people time out they are calculated as working editors for 4 months before that happens) and you have chosen, because of your own agenda, to ignore the figures, the reason for it being an estimate and like most things just chosen to try and distort what the site is, distort what editors say and all for your own agenda and not to DMOZ detriment, but to the detriment of those who come here wanting to know why, how, why not or when or whatever about DMOZ.

By all means argue that DMOZ carries no value for SEO purposes, but not sure who you will argue with. Snooks and Jim Noble often say that it has no more value than a link (I don't under stand most of this stuff so you don't usually see me more than saying this is what is usually said about DMOZ these days). But I guess as I have said before, you are obviously so vitriolic about DMOZ...1. people can draw their own conclusions and 2. you must have a huge chip on your shoulder about them. Amazing what people can get upset, worked up about and want to spend their time trying to demolish something that is simply a group of people across the world who want to get on with pursuing their hobby. Talk about being bitter and twisted.

 

No, jim answered it. He said that its not something tracked, and continued with how to find the answer. YOU DID NOTHING OF THE SORT! jim has been FAR more helpful in this thread then you have been on this entire site, which could lead one to believe how helpful you have been to the ODP as a whole. As its clear you car nothing for those interested in the ODP unless they are an editor...

So even with Joes sarcasm, an answer of NONE was a better answer than dragging it out for 5 posts by saying NOTHING what-so-ever.

 

Ok show me in Jim's post where he refers to sites offered in a month being listed in that month. Jim refers to the total number of sites added in a month which will include editor finds and also reviews of sites that are months and years old.

The op asked about which sites submitted in the last month had been listed within that month. NOT if any sites from anywhere had been listed in the last month.