motsa - 4:38 pm on Feb 21, 2005 (gmt 0) You're arguing about something that is a non-issue. It wouldn't have mattered if her application was accepted in an hour.
Why does that seem unreasonable? The fact of the matter is that new editor application data is available only to meta editors and above. However much you think it should be otherwise, that's the way it is.
In a private message I offered - pro bono - to evaluate and make recommendations (with a signed confidentiality agreement). I was informed that doing so would be impossible because of confidentiality issues. ODP needs, in my opinion, to get past self-importance. These aren't nuclear secrets.
As I pointed out in your other thread, she asked 1 day in advance and wasn't answered until the proper day. And we've never required that people get their editor name correct in an r-z status check in order to be accepted as an editor.
Well I disagree. Spelling and grammar maybe. Requesting a review in advance of the time required, not remembering the submission date (what happened to the confirming email?) and getting her proposed editor's name wrong - twice suggest a lack of attention to detail.
She wasn't accepted 5 minutes after applying. It took 2 weeks. That isn't a short time span. I realize you were waiting longer but you also had applied for a category with fewer meta editors interested in reviewing new applications.
Then there is the issue that she just happens to be employed as a SEO by a web developer with 300 clients. If affiliate site are reviewed for potential conflicts (and I'm not sure that they are) then that process alone would seemingly make this a very lengthy application to approve.
You're arguing about something that is a non-issue. It wouldn't have mattered if her application was accepted in an hour.