Forum Moderators: open
Of course, this is based on my limited knowledge of applying to edit three categories and my business partner applying for another one.
What exactley do "they" look at regarding the application... the sites you suggest, your affiliations...is there any concrete criteria or more to the particular editor that reviews?
Thanks again for your input.
Kevin
What exactley do "they" look at regarding the application
I am pretty sure spelling is also a criteria:)
I've heard it is a good idea the first time not to apply for the cat you really want. Best bet is to find some small, bottom level cat in a mess. Like lots of dead sites listed in it, title/desciptions not matching style, etc. Then clean up that cat to make it a model one in the DMOZ. My guess is that once you are in with one cat, getting more is a lot easier so long as you are doing a great job.
I've heard it is a good idea the first time not to apply for the cat you really want.
That's not necessarily correct. If you want Society: Religion_and_Spirituality: Christianity: Denominations: Catholicism, it certainly might be, although that depends upon who you are. If you were some guy in Minnesota, you would do better applying for Society: Religion and Spirituality: Christianity: Denominations: Catholicism: Parishes: North America: United States: Minnesota and then working your way up.
If, however, you are Pope John Paul, you would quite likely be approved.
As for whether or not you've been rejected, it is possible for a meta to deny an application without notifying the applicant. This was originally used by metas who suspected a nutcase applicant who might retaliate against the meta if that meta's name were affixed to the bottom of a rejection letter. Unfortunately, some of the metas use that option fairly routinely, so lack of a rejection letter does not mean you have not been rejected.
Yes, spelling is but one of the many crieria (Most of the hints are in the Guidlelines on the ODP site)
... as is, umm, knowing the difference between excepted and accepted.
One is an odd plastic manufacturing category (I'm actually surprised it was its own category). Anyway, my dad created the industry and I worked in it my whole life and was Dir. of Marketing for it when I left. When I added my site, I also added my client's two largest competitors.
I now run an internet marketing company...surprise...but work with all kinds of marketing companies in my area and am active in the American Marketing Assoc. Therefore, I was able to get the editor position for "my area marketing" even though there was a slight conflict of interest. The question is, who would want to edit the category who is not in marketing in my area and what qualifications would they have to do so?
My conclusion...like any other job...show that you have the credentials and you might have a better chance.
Good Luck
And, g1smd, your rite about the seplling, but I werent gonna say nothing.
;)
Why can't the DMOZ in such cases then just send a generic rejection letter without the metas name? I have no idea what happened with those earlier applications. However, I think it best here to apply Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." I can't think of any good reason that I'd be rejected. However, it could just be the software lost my application, etc. The cat in question was not only minor, but also a totally non-commercial cat where concerns about possible abuse would be likely.
Unfortunately, some of the metas use that option fairly routinely...
In practice this option is mainly used when a meta doesn't want the person to reapply again.
Why can't the DMOZ in such cases then just send a generic rejection letter without the metas name?
They can.
In practice this option is mainly used when a meta doesn't want the person to reapply again.
While it may be that this is true, it doesn't make any sense to me at all. Wouldn't it be more expedient to simply use the "Anonymous (staff@dmoz.org) reply" option? That is, after all, the very reason staff instituted that option, if memory serves.
That way, at least the applicant is aware of what's going on, as opposed to the "no reply" option which leaves one wondering whether the application even got to ODP.
G.
more correspondence and work for an already understaffed editor corps.
A problem which would be solved if DMOZ didn't consider itself an exclusive club and if they responded to applications.
Just a bit frustrated for never getting a response from them. And don't tell me I tried too big a category (don't exist in Switzerland) or I make to many spelling mistakes or that my descriptions are not good enough (never had a problem at zeal). :(
G.
In regards to site submission...
Grumpus....<<To me it seems that adding a site to the directory would take less time than it took to read my question, check my site, and reply, but maybe that's just me.>>
Definately makes sense to me Grumpus.
I have watched the DMOZ Forum for a number of days now. While I think it's a great place for people to go that have questions and they respond very quickly, it does make me wonder a few things. At last check, currently logged in was one editor, one editall, one Editall/Catmv, one Catmod, one Meta, and four members. That means that there were 5 people who *could* go ahead and review the sites for those who post a status request, and have *been* waiting more than say, two months. But rather than one of these 5 people do that, one of them replies that it's in the queue and they have to just give it more time. I know it can take alot of time to review a site, that they are backlogged in some categories, and I know they are way in need of editors. My concern here is that some people have been waiting several months to be listed in a category with 300 unreviewed already, with no editor. Their site may damn near die from lack of traffic, while waiting to be submitted. Being listed in DMOZ is very important to success, I think.
Not being sarcastic, I really just don't know, but what are the other 4 editors doing there? Why does it take 5 editors/metas/etc. to Moderate the Board? Perhaps, it's just me, but it seems useless for more than one or two to be logged in at any given time. What about the idea of having one of the Editors specifically there just to review inquiries that have been waiting X amount of time? Just a suggestion.....
I'm sure there are many people that forgot about their submission or just don't care how long it takes because they are listed everywhere else, or they have many many sites. But, what about let's say, "guyX", who DOES care, only has one brand new site that has been waiting several months, has followed all the rules, and he's motivated enough to find the forum and post a status question? Why couldn't an editor that was logged in, just do a review, based on the above situation, and save "guyX" some grief?
Just my thoughts here....I've only been waiting a couple of weeks and it's killing me, I really feel for the guys who have been waiting several months.
In regards to editor approval.....
Laisha...<<That way, at least the applicant is aware of what's going on, as opposed to the "no reply" option which leaves one wondering whether the application even got to ODP.>>
I also agree with you. It's merely a courtesy to reply at least and say, "Thank you for your interest in ODP, but unfortunately.....".
I really love DMOZ, and I even applied myself to be an editor 6 days ago. No word yet, but I sure hope I get at least some sort of notification if I get rejected. Otherwise, I will be very insulted and may form a very different opinion about ODP, as a webmaster, and as a user.
Why couldn't an editor that was logged in, just do a review, based on the above situation, and save "guyX" some grief?
Because that would be unfair to every other "guyX" who had been waiting patiently to have their sites reviewed.
Under normal circumstances, I would agree. Getting to the head of the line for *no reason* is not fair. Getting ahead of the line *for* a reason, is valid, in my opinion. What I mean is when "guyX" has already waited several months, taken the effort to find the forum, post the questions, wait for answers, in my opinion, deserves to be a little higher in line, than simply "guyZ" who doesn't make any effort in inquiring, just doesn't care, or has only been waiting less than a month. Maybe a fine line needs to be determined for priority, say 3 months since submission, or something like that.
I'm not speaking of myself as "guyX" here, I'm just simply stating an opinion. I know that for myself, and probly most people, that I would be totally fine if I was next in line for review and the Editor went ahead and did "guyX"s review before mine. He has waited long enough - go ahead and do his first.
I feel really bad for some of these honest people that have had to wait for SO long.
(Added -- waiting patiently and waiting 3 months or more is also different. :)
Remember, failure with style is an art form, you don't get good at it without practice and setting goals.
PS- Just spell checked this with MS Word, but don't understand what all those green squiggly lines mean.
We don't use the fora as an opportunity for people to "jump the queue". However, if you ask about a site, and the editor finds that the queue is very small, then it does sometimes happen that the editor will review all the sites in that category. If there are hundreds of sites in the queue or if the category is one that the editor is not familiar with, or there is a local editor for the category and is active, then the editor answering your question in the fora is unlikely to touch the site. I have often seen someone enquire about a site, and the editor has gone into the category and cleaned out duplicate and spam submissions so as to give the local editor an easier job reviewing the useful stuff later on.
>> I really just don't know, but what are the other 4 editors doing there? <<
What would this forum be like if it was just say Bird and Brett [picking just two names at random] answering questions, and everyone else wasn't invited to comment? No, the ODP is vast so it is quite natural that about 50 editors do log in on a very regular basis. You will get a faster response to the question, experience covering a wide range of the directory, and less chance that there becomes just one editor running the entire board with his own unchecked opinion, rather then the consensus that the ODP usually operates on. Don't forget that there a number of French, German, and Spanish editors who can also deal with specific questions in those languages.
>> I would be interested to know if anybody has been rejected in a time even shorter than 12 hours. <<
I am guessing, but I would expect that probably at least 10 to 20% of submissions every day are so bad that they are rejected within 10 seconds of looking at them.
You make several good points, which I can understand. And even though I might not like *all* of the practices at ODP, I have to admit that I have seen a few editors accept a site shortly after the status inquiry. So, I'll give ya that one. ;)
You guys do have a tremendously difficult job sometimes, not to mention time consuming, for free non the less. I do respect you guys. I guess when I do get my application for editor approved ;), I'm sure I'll understand a bit more.
Karen :)
Maybe I do have the record for rejection ( and this is what started my original post for this thread) I was rejected the same evening I posted my app. Mere hours! Utterly efficient and they nicely said the category was too big. Reapplied and have no such record on that status.
