How long it takes to appear in DMOZ?

There are MANY sites in DMOZ that have no PR, so PR is not (or should not) be a factor. It should be all about content... if it was about PR, then they would have a PR 3 or 4 restriction, as PR1 & 2 are not all that hard to get

As for the wait time "up to two weeks or more" by most accounts... and by "or more" I mean never *smirk*

Submit & forget!

 

i've been waiting for my site to be listed also, its been 2 months since I submitted my site.

Do they send you email for notification that your link is listed?

 

No, almost never. They wont say if your site is accepted or rejected, hence the "submit & forget" mantra.

 

i have been waiting about 6 months now and still no confirmation

 

have you checked the category? They will NOT send a confirmation, so the only way to confirm getting a listing is to randomly check back (after a year or so, LOL)

 

It will take 1 to 3 months.

 

I've been waiting 2 years I actually saw them on mu site last week and I still didn't get in. Se my screenshot here:
http://www.lakeland-printing.com/blog/tryng-to-get-in-dmoz-more-evidence-of-dmoz-corruption.html

 

I read your blog post... first off Google no longer recommends directory submission, not even Yahoo or DMOZ. Secondly... the fact that an editor appears to have visited your site recently isn't exactly corruption proof is it?

Just because an editor visited doesn't mean that the site had to have been accepted or rejected

 

@lakeland

Because you arent yet in, yet you saw a "visit"........its corruption?

...and gee, making claims like that is really going to make an editor want to review your site?

You are a sad, sorry fool that makes rash assumptions.

 

We've said it time and again here but I'll say it again - loud.

You can't deduce anything from a visit to your website with a dmoz.org referrer.

You can't deduce anything from the lack of one either - I and many others work with referrers disabled .

We have editors and robots looking at websites for all sorts of reasons.

• They're checking for a dysfunctional one.
• They're deciding whether or not they want to evaluate it 'right now'. If not they leave it in the pool for later.
• They're deciding whether or not the site is listable (you can check this for yourself). If it isn't , they'll bin it. If they're not sure, they'll leave it in the pool and maybe seek advice.
• If they think it's listable, they'll decide whether or not it's listable in this category. If it is, they'll usually write a proper title and description for it and list it. If it isn't, they'll choose a more appropriate category and send it to there - where the whole process will be repeated .

That's not corruption, it's work flow.

It also points up that category selection is important when suggesting a website - probably more important than suggesting a perfect guidelines compliant title and description.

ODP is a volunteer organisation and editors edit where they wish, when they wish and as much as they wish within the constraints of their permissions. It has no system to force people to do work that they don't volunteer to do. ODP is not a free listing service for website owners and it does not attempt to process their listing suggestions within the time scales desired by them.

<added> If you suggest a website to say five different categories, you're both ignoring our ToC and creating five times the workload - thus contributing to a process slow down for everybody. Now that is abuse</added>

 

you all are so naive. Do some Googling and see other comments. It's real, and it's happening. And the one that commented..what do you mean you read my blog posts? On which site? On my printing site a get between 600 and 1,000 uniques a day. I do quite well considering I started this from my home two years ago and last month I opened up a storefront.
I don't promote crap, we have a respectable business relying on a whole lot more than adsense revenue.

It's just pure frustration on my end perhaps. Anyway it's common sense that the Editors on a power trip, and very easy for one to scam their way into becoming an editor. It's funny how the editors come out of the woodwork when you have something to say negative? Isn't it?

 

Take care what you say lest I scramble a black helicopter

 

Hmmm defensive arn't we? I never said that you promote crap, nor did I say anything about the amount of traffic you get. I merely pointed out that unlike many who visit the forum I did take the time to go and read the blog post that you linked to.

No one said corruption isn't real or that it isn't happening, we pointed out to you that your evidence, or lack of it. Doesn't really prove anything.

As for your PM...

Seeing as I am an editor I guess not

 

Not just "these days". We are always keen to accept new volunteer editors, so if you are interested in helping to build and improve the directory, please consider applying!

There is some helpful information in the public guidelines here, and in the unofficial public forum here.

 

Lol, man I waited 6 month until I got approved on DMOZ... I think is a waste of time, better submit your site to 100 PR 2 directories that approve it instantly...

 

I think you are talking about your site suggestion.
Just to be clear, my comments were referring to people who would like to join the volunteer editors in building the directory. Editor applications are usually reviewed within a few days to weeks, not 6 months.

 

What else could that be? I really hit a nerve with this person. Maybe this person is honest, and if so I commend him but nobody can tell me that there isn't corruption.

 

There is no corruption in ODP

I can happily say this because I can not offer proof that anyone in DMOZ is willing to accept as proof of any wrong doing. Heh... and keep in mind, it's perfectly OK for a single editor to have over 10k listings all deep links to an affiliated site ALL put there by an automated system, rather then by hand like the rest of our sites need to be added. SOOOOO... if that is OK, then good luck offering anything else up that'll sway them into thinking there is corruption of any kind

Oh, for my proof, look up Rich Skrenta (ya know, the guy that wrote the first computer virus) He's one of the founders of the ODP, which he's claimed to have started to promote his own sites (which is something NOT allowed by the ODP guidelines) *shrug* He's also an editor still, that is still seemingly editing and still listing his own sites...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Directory_Project#Controversy_and_criticism

 

Remember that there is a huge difference between volunteer ODP editors and paid AOL staff, and also between "workers" and "management", just as within any large organisation.

 

Well, any organization that allows it's upper level "staff" break any and all guidelines does not shine too brightly on anything below them, as the morals are set though leading by example...and if the examples show that the guidelines do not need to be followed people can make up their own minds as to whether or not corruption exists.