Anyway ti check a listing date?

Wondering...is there anyway ti check a date on when a site was listed in ODP?

 

Attick, not that I'm aware of.

Don't shock me - did they finally accept your pedal car site?

 

Hey Spider-man. The site still isn't listed as far as I can see. Looked today and just curious how many of the sites that are listed were submitted after mine.

Some people are into selfmutilation, I think about ODP.

 

Maybe try: www.archive.org/

Quote of the year!

 

Archive.org seemed to stop caching and/or exporting site archives in August 2007. Why? I'm f%&*$d if I know, but I'd love to!

 

http://www.archive.org/about/faqs.php

 

Sites which were being cached and indexed by archive.org were showing new caches every month or so, or for the bigger sites like eBay, google, dmoz, etc - almost on a daily, if not weekly basis. I'm yet to find *any* site showing a cache date after August 27th 2007. Correct me if I'm wrong, that's 7 months and something has drastically changed as the caches until August last year were shown within a couple of weeks at most.

 

An editor could check internal logs to get that information, but of course they can't make that information public. If there's reason for ODP to know, they have the means.

 

To make things more clear ANY editor can get that information even if he/she just joined as brand new editor, so easiest way is to become editor of some obscure irrelevant category with zero commercial value nobody cares about and you can easily read all those top secret DMOZ editing logs which are kept hidden from public.

 

I don't know why they are hidden from the public. Editors seem to have no issues with discussing each of my 27 edits *shrug*

 

Here's a thought, junior. Maybe there could be just ONE ODP thread that isn't diverted off-topic to be about YOU?
Only reason your edits are memorable anyway is because they are so durn few they can be memorized.
Face it... your adds written on one's fingers still leave one hand free of ink.

Now IF the moderators have a brain... they'll see the trend and boot your worthless butt.
If not they're welcome to boot me, cause if they think you're on topic they're on crack anyway.

 

I think you are being very unfair to Christopher. He waited until post 10 until he made the thread about him. Usually it is post 2.

 

Tell me, if it was brought up about edit history, and I say that my edit history was made public how is that me taking things off topic. Edit history is something that the general public does not now. On the other hand, Rob has brought mine up several times.

On the other hand, how are two posts following mine talking about nothing even related to anything that was brought up before on topic?

If anyone wants to seriously see a trend here it would be editors dragging topics completely off base whenever something actually starts to be come a decent conversation... though I don't really get their infatuation with talking about me.

In a thread about asking when a list was listed, is about editor edits, as the information is not generally public. That fact was brought up by Annie. I simply stated that some editors had NO problems making such information public. Now, if I am somehow wrong or misleading, then it looks like I'll be able to hit that abuse button for Rob again...

So tell me again, who is off topic here? Me talking about edits or you two talking about me?